From: earthrisepress@hotmail.com[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 8:49 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [MFDiscuss] Re: Global visions and plans For over 50 megabytes of documentation regarding the hypocritical lack of justice within the Baha'i Faith see the Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Documentation ranges over more than a decade, including the coercion and suppression of US Baha'i academics at such major universities as the University of Michigan and Indiana University. Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com earthrisepress@hotmail.com >From: "mesbah_javid" >Reply-To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com >To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [MFDiscuss] Re: Global visions and plans >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 03:04:23 -0000 > >Globalization itself is an intrinsic feature of the evolution of >human society. It has brought into existence a socio-economic >culture that, at the practical level, constitutes the world in which >the aspirations of the human race will be pursued in the century now >opening. No objective observer, if he is fair-minded in his >judgement, will deny that both of the two contradictory reactions it >is arousing are, in large measure, well justified. The unification >of human society, forged by the fires of the twentieth century, is a >reality that with every passing day opens breath-taking new >possibilities. A reality also being forced on serious minds >everywhere, is the claim of justice to be the one means capable of >harnessing these great potentialities to the advancement of >civilization. It no longer requires the gift of prophecy to realize >that the fate of humanity in the century now opening will be >determined by the relationship established between these two >fundamental forces of the historical process, the inseparable >principles of unity and justice. > >Century of Light: >https://bahai-library.org/published.uhj/century.light/century11.html > ---------- From: [SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 8:49 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [MFDiscuss] Re: Global visions and plans For over 50 megabytes of documentation regarding the hypocritical lack of justice within the Baha'i Faith see the Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Documentation ranges over more than a decade, including the coercion and suppression of US Baha'i academics at such major universities as the University of Michigan and Indiana University. Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com earthrisepress@hotmail.com >From: "mesbah_javid" >Reply-To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com >To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [MFDiscuss] Re: Global visions and plans >Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 03:04:23 -0000 > >Globalization itself is an intrinsic feature of the evolution of >human society. It has brought into existence a socio-economic >culture that, at the practical level, constitutes the world in which >the aspirations of the human race will be pursued in the century now >opening. No objective observer, if he is fair-minded in his >judgement, will deny that both of the two contradictory reactions it >is arousing are, in large measure, well justified. The unification >of human society, forged by the fires of the twentieth century, is a >reality that with every passing day opens breath-taking new >possibilities. A reality also being forced on serious minds >everywhere, is the claim of justice to be the one means capable of >harnessing these great potentialities to the advancement of >civilization. It no longer requires the gift of prophecy to realize >that the fate of humanity in the century now opening will be >determined by the relationship established between these two >fundamental forces of the historical process, the inseparable >principles of unity and justice. > >Century of Light: >https://bahai-library.org/published.uhj/century.light/century11.html > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. https://www.hotmail.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Tiny Wireless Camera under $80! Order Now! FREE VCR Commander! Click Here - Only 1 Day Left! https://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/xYTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: MFDiscuss-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to https://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ---------- From: BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing[SMTP:patrick_henry@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 7:06 AM Subject: NOTICE - No longer archiving individual selected messages for BahaiCensorship2002.zip - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience I will no longer be archiving individual selected messages for 2002. If you would like your messages included in BahaiCensorship2002.zip, please save and archive them for me in text format with the *.txt extension. My only request is that they were posted to either alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai during 2002. I prefer predominantly a chronological order, though it's not required. Please send the text file to me by about mid-December 2002 at f_glaysher@hotmail.com or whatever email address appears on my bahai homepage later this year, should it change. Also, please send to my attention, at the same email address, any major documents that might happen along this year. I have a number of duties that necessitate more time and attention and must minimize my involvement, after more than five years, to only perhaps my reposts roughly once a month. Since talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai are firmly established as the only forums about the bahai faith that can not be controlled and censored, whether by bahai fundamentalists or liberals, I am confident that the time is right for me to turn to other concerns, "The Bower of Nil" and my epic poem, "long sought but much delayed," "The Parliament of Poets." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/LettersAmD1989-1994.htm "When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. I thank God that I have been able to document the dishonesty and injustices of the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais. I shall continue to make my website available for interested people. As a Baha'i for over twenty-five years, I hope, God willing, Baha'u'llah shall somehow redeem His Dispensation from the fundamentalists who have hamstrung His Revelation.... In His Service, Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@home.com] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:36 AM To: Grim_Reaper_Mk2@btinternet.com Subject: Hate to see you go.... Dermod, Sorry to see you go. For unrelated reasons, I have to scale down at the moment. Logistically, I think it's the right move. People hate my guts so much it's more effective to let others take up the slack without my providing the scapegoat. I don't know where McKenny gets the patience to actually discuss anything with the fundies! Watch out for those packages. Other duties call.... Best, Fred ---------- From: DEBORAH BUCHHORN[SMTP:debbuch@flash.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 3:42 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Dear Fred. I replied to this message long ago, but it was returned. It think your box was full. Don't know. I have it. I will fax it to you. Give me your fax number. I would like to say to Fred, that I heard from the NSA. They slapped my hand for suing them. They were upset saying I had published the suit on the internet which you know was not me. It was Mr. Marinakis. That's OK. I didn't object when I found out, but, I didn't do it. They have asked me to trust that they are going to deal with the issues I raised in my letters. They have said they are going to deal directly with this Assembly. I am waiting. What will this mean???? I'm just waiting to see. I have reported the fraud I found in the books to the IRS and Tax and Revenue. Basicly they are breaking all the employment laws and not reporting paying people to the membership. They claim they are paying their teachers on the Baha'i Newsreel, but in the books they are buying supplies. They have paid no withholding to the state. The state is going to address this. They have said so. I am waiting.....waiting until Ridvan when I will get another annual report and then I will go to the House. Keep this under wraps please. I will keep you posted. I understand the frustration, believe me. But patience is the only way right now. I would like to say that I think suing them was a mistake. I should have filed a grievance with the Attorney General against a corporation for fraud. I think that would have been more effective. You live and learn. Best DB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:29 PM > Deborah, > > Do you have a copy of the judge's ruling? I'd > appreciate receiving a copy, if you do. I'd > prefer an emailed one but if it's easier for > you a hard copy would work. I've asked Yorgos > but he's referred me to you. > > Thanks. > > Best, > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > 668 Bolinger > Rochester Hills, Michigan 48307 > FG@hotmail.com > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:46 AM To: debbuch@flash.net Subject: NM Judgment Deborah, I'm afraid I never received your earlier email but would still like to receive a copy of the judgment for my own knowledge and to place on my website. I believe your experience is very important in itself and needs to be documented and available for the benefit of others. FAX: 248-608-6424 Your machine should automatically connect AFTER the answering machine message. Interesting point you make about the attorney general. Hope things work out for you. If the nsa handles you with anything remotely like justice, it'll be a first in my opinion. Good luck. Best, Fred Glaysher FG@hotmail.com >From: "DEBORAH BUCHHORN" >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: Re: >Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 01:42:57 -0700 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [207.115.63.77] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE0D36540007400431D5CF733F4DC46F0; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:41:57 -0800 >Received: from 2mxmv01 (A010-0632.ALBQ.splitrock.net [209.254.243.124])by pimout1-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g0F8fOl119296for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 03:41:25 -0500 >From debbuch@flash.net Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:42:19 -0800 >Message-ID: <033401c19da0$a2d0b6c0$7cf3fed1@2mxmv01> >References: >X-Priority: 3 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 > >Dear Fred. I replied to this message long ago, but it was returned. It >think your box was full. Don't know. I have it. I will fax it to you. >Give me your fax number. I would like to say to Fred, that I heard from the >NSA. They slapped my hand for suing them. They were upset saying I had >published the suit on the internet which you know was not me. It was Mr. >Marinakis. That's OK. I didn't object when I found out, but, I didn't do >it. They have asked me to trust that they are going to deal with the issues >I raised in my letters. They have said they are going to deal directly with >this Assembly. I am waiting. What will this mean???? >I'm just waiting to see. I have reported the fraud I found in the books to >the IRS and Tax and Revenue. Basicly they are breaking all the employment >laws and not reporting paying people to the membership. They claim they are >paying their teachers on the Baha'i Newsreel, but in the books they are >buying supplies. They have paid no withholding to the state. The state is >going to address this. They have said so. I am waiting.....waiting until >Ridvan when I will get another annual report and then I will go to the >House. Keep this under wraps please. I will keep you posted. I >understand the frustration, believe me. But patience is the only way right >now. I would like to say that I think suing them was a mistake. I should >have filed a grievance with the Attorney General against a corporation for >fraud. I think that would have been more effective. You live and learn. >Best DB >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Frederick Glaysher" >To: >Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:29 PM > > > > Deborah, > > > > Do you have a copy of the judge's ruling? I'd > > appreciate receiving a copy, if you do. I'd > > prefer an emailed one but if it's easier for > > you a hard copy would work. I've asked Yorgos > > but he's referred me to you. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Best, > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > 668 Bolinger > > Rochester Hills, Michigan 48307 > > FG@hotmail.com > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 10:15 AM Subject: NYTIMES - Compare bahai fundamentalism January 27, 2002 Bernard Lewis Asks 'What Went Wrong?' Between Islam and the West By PAUL KENNEDY https://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/books/review/27KENNEDT.html In early 1979 the authoritarian and much-disliked regime of the Shah of Iran collapsed, to the rejoicing of left-wing groups everywhere in the West. Quite by chance, I was to dine in those same days in Princeton with the renowned historians Fritz Stern and John Elliott, plus one other scholar. The fourth dining partner arrived late, apologetic and a little rueful. He had given a radio interview earlier in the day, warning that the shah's overthrow by Muslim clerics would lead not to social improvement and democracy but to theocracy, intolerance and clerically controlled mayhem. This was not a popular opinion. A fellow professor, distinguished in the field of international law but knowing little of Iran, deplored such conservatism and pessimism. And many Princeton students were outraged, since they were sure that the Iranian people, freed from the shah's yoke, would join the modern, anticapitalist, freethinking world. The gloomy, skeptical scholar was surely mistaken, and should feel ashamed of himself. No wonder he was a little rueful. The fourth dining partner that evening was the distinguished historian of the Islamic, Arabic and Middle Eastern worlds Bernard Lewis, for many years the Cleveland E. Dodge professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton. As it happened, the radical, protesting students were quite wrong, and the individual and maligned scholar was completely right. He actually knew what he was talking about, because he had been studying the Muslim world -- its history, literature, culture -- for over 30 years. He had some claim to offer an opinion that deserved respect. There is a lesson here. The same authority is still going strong. A couple of years ago he published a wonderful collection of occasional pieces, named (appropriately enough) ''A Middle East Mosaic,'' which offered numerous vignettes of a region both fascinating and disturbing. Now he has produced what may be his most significant work for a contemporary audience. ''What Went Wrong?'' is a concise study of the Muslim world's responses to the West and of its own long, sad decline. It was completed, one must emphasize, some time before Sept. 11. Scholars of international and Middle Eastern affairs like Lewis did not need Osama bin Laden's attacks, the subsequent war against the Taliban and revelations of our shaky, ambivalent friendships with Pakistan or Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to recognize that things were out of joint between the West and much of the Muslim world. What the events of the past few months did was to call this enormous problem to the attention of a far wider audience. On the whole, the varied societies of our planet are marching, however briskly or reluctantly, in lock step with an America of laissez-faire economics, cultural pluralism and political democracy. This was and is a heady stew, and one that took Western Europe and North America four or five generations to absorb. To expect Argentina or Indonesia or China or Ukraine to swallow such changes in a far shorter time is probably asking too much. No wonder we hear the creakings and crashings of the structures of the post-1945 world order all around us. But in the Middle East the difficulties present not just another case of traditional societies having to come to terms with the forces of modernization. The unvarnished truth is that the tensions there are of a different order of magnitude. The region extends over a vast, sprawling area, where a badly damaged though powerful and religiously driven order is locked in confrontation with global trends more penetrating and unsettling than could ever have been imagined when Muslim self-confidence was at its peak some centuries ago. What Lewis is writing about in ''What Went Wrong?'' concerns one of the greatest cultural and political divides in modern history. Sometime around 1760, Britain, then France and America took off to another world, one that was increasingly secular, democratic, industrial and tolerant in ways that left many of the other regions gasping at the combined implications of such changes. Certain societies in parts of Latin America or India or Russia felt they had little choice but to follow suit, although hoping to brake the impacts of Western man. The Middle East, powerful a half-millennium earlier, when Europe was a bundle of inchoate, backward states and unworthy of attention, did not. Yet Europe rose while the Muslim world rested on its laurels -- until it was besieged by Western ships, armaments, iron goods and cheap textiles, to all of which it became harder and harder to respond. The West's cultural messages, especially about democracy, made things even more difficult. Those with power in Muslim societies found it impossible to contemplate the separation of religion and state, or admit to a changed place in society for women or permit the free exchange of ideas, particularly unpleasant ideas, on the lines argued by John Stuart Mill and others. But there is even more to it than that. As Lewis shrewdly points out, the works of Mozart and Shakespeare and Voltaire have traveled around the globe, as for that matter have Stravinsky, jazz and George Orwell. But they all pretty much stop at the frontiers of the Arab world, which has shown little interest in how others think, write, compose; there are few translations of these writers and few performances of these musicians, nor are there great libraries and museums of Western art to match the impressive collections of Muslim culture in the West. (There is no presumption by Lewis here that Western or Slavic or Japanese culture is inherently superior, only that it is disturbing that this troubled part of our planet has never really cared.) It is not that the Muslim world was totally without attempts at reform and renewal in the face of global trends, or that there was no appreciation that its own earlier superiority had vanished. In fact, Lewis is extremely good i n detailing Ottoman and Arab and Iranian scholars who, from the 18th century onward, called with growing alarm for change. The sad fact is that for the most part their calls went unheeded. Among the many reasons for such a failure discussed in this remarkably succinct account, one especially stands out. It is that the reformers split into two diametrically opposed camps: the Western-oriented movements, which sought adaptation, imitation and accommodation with modernity, though within a moderately Muslim order of things; and the conservatives, who angrily claimed that the reason for the decline was traitorous forces within their own societies, those who had strayed from the true path of the prophet. These forces, the conservatives argued, were even more sinful and deserved more punishment than the infidels themselves. It is not difficult, in reading these earlier denunciations of Arab liberals, to recall bin Laden's recent ferocious speeches against the Saudi leadership and others in the Middle East for defiling the true faith. And yet, because ''What Went Wrong?'' was written before the Sept. 11 attacks, it has no reference to the immediate crisis, nor has it therefore any prescriptions for the United States, or the West in general. This is not a text that will directly help Donald H. Rumsfeld as he waits for his morning briefings. In a way, however, this is the book's great strength, and its claim upon our attention: for it offers a long view in the midst of so much short-term and confusing punditry on television, in the op-ed pages, on campuses and in strategic studies think tanks. My guess is that Lewis feels that should bin Laden be killed, his Qaeda network destroyed and a reasonable truce prevail in Afghanistan, the problem he describes will not have gone away, because it is a far deeper and bigger question for world society than even the awful terrorist attacks on the United States late last summer. What, then, is to be done? At the end of the day, Lewis argues, the answer lies within the Muslim world itself. Either its societies, especially those in the Middle East, will continue in ''a downward spiral of hate and spite, rage and self-pity, poverty and oppression,'' with all that implies for a horrible and troubled future; or ''they can abandon grievance and victimhood, settle their differences and join their talents, energies and resources in a common creative endeavor'' to the benefit of themselves and the rest of our planet. Perhaps the outside world can help a bit, though probably not much. ''For the time being, the choice is their own.'' With this final sentence, and all that precedes it, Lewis has done us all -- Muslim and non-Muslim alike -- a remarkable service. Paul Kennedy is a professor of history at Yale University and the author or editor of 15 books, including ''The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.'' -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 11:26 AM Subject: Re: How many Artifical Assemblies in BF? "Alma Engels" wrote in message news:DNm98.23424$Hb6.2140655@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > Dear Beth, > > You may have a valid point. My latest newsletter from Phoenix, AZ, LSA > states that there will be a meeting Feb 24 for all Valley Baha'is. There > will be presentations by Mr. Habib Riazati and Judge James Nelson at the > meeting hosted by the Persian-American Working Group. That should read "Iranian-American." Persia doesn't exist. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:02 AM Subject: Re: How many Artifical Assemblies in BF? Alma, Common, yes. Why do you think Iranian-bahais conceal and distort their true nationality? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Alma Engels" wrote in message news:j9D98.25728$Hb6.2339093@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > Fred -- I am quoting and that is what the newsletter said. Moreover, it is > quite common to refer to those from Iran as Persian. > > In peace, > Alma > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:a4674h$1bf8mb$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > "Alma Engels" wrote in message > > news:DNm98.23424$Hb6.2140655@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > > > Dear Beth, > > > > > > You may have a valid point. My latest newsletter from Phoenix, AZ, LSA > > > states that there will be a meeting Feb 24 for all Valley Baha'is. > There > > > will be presentations by Mr. Habib Riazati and Judge James Nelson at the > > > meeting hosted by the Persian-American Working Group. > > > > > > That should read "Iranian-American." Persia doesn't exist. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:16 AM Subject: Conference Call - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience -Conference Call - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Conference Call - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Conference Call - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Now may be the time for a conference of Baha'is of all persuasions to come together and debate the great issues of freedom of speech and conscience in the Baha'i Faith for the salvation of the Cause of the Blessed Beauty. I invite Juan Cole to consider hosting such a conference at the University of Michigan for the participation of people of all points of view, including representatives of the administrative order. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:27 AM Subject: Fundamentalist psycopath THREATENS me again..... For over two years this unbalanced fundamentalist has harassed me in a number of ways, necessitating my filing a police report against him in January of 2000. See his message below sent to my business email, interfering with the operation of my gainful employment. I urge the non-bahai observer to reflect carefully and seriously on the 50+ megabytes of evidence of bahai fundamentalist dishonesty and terrorism that exists on my website via the link below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship From elley@intercoast.com.au Sun, 10 Feb 2002 23:13:54 -0800 Received: from [203.22.112.12] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE30BA1B006B400431D4CB16700C93600; Sun, 10 Feb 2002 23:13:33 -0800 Received: from Elderkin (pmq54.intercoast.com.au [203.32.99.54]) by cracker.intercoast.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g1B7GBg02902 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:16:12 +1100 Message-ID: <006301c1b2cb$c65eeea0$366320cb@Elderkin> From: "Mark Elderkin" To: Subject: Need a house......... Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:14:38 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0060_01C1B327.F7EA2BE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Elderkin To: fredglaysher@xxxx Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 2:14 AM Subject: Need a house......... What I really need is for you to quit spamming the NGs. As long as you spam, I'll continue to find ways of letting others know how to keep in contact with you. Say what you want and do it in a proper way and there is no problem......... keep spamming and cross-posting to people and using the name 'bahai faith' and I'll keep up with your antics. If enough people tell you to stop........ then maybe you will. ----- My Continuing Harassment post from 2000 and 2001 appears below: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/CHarassment.htm I believe it is the counter on my website, registering over 21,000 hits as of late February 2001, that inspires the desperate, futile efforts of my fellow Bahais to silence and discredit me, as well as their fanatical attempts to suppress any possible knowledge of the truth documented there. In February 2000, I filed a police report regarding a variety of items and placed a trace on my telephone line. Other actions have been taken. While my fellow Bahais continue to attack, harass, malign, and slander me on talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, AOL, and elsewhere, falsely accusing me of "spamming," of misrepresenting the intrigues of the "universal" house of "justice" to silence and ostracize people, of being mentally unstable and so on, it has been widely observed by other Bahais and non-Bahais that Bahai fundamentalists routinely refuse all discussion of the facts and EVIDENCE of the oppression and tyranny committed by the uhj. Those interested in impartially judging my sanity and background for themselves may find my bio helpful: https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm The non-Bahai observer might want to give careful consideration to the probability that the ujh itself supports and encourages this person in his continual harassment of me since I notified them of his actions on January 30, 2000, and again on February 24, 2001, receiving back confirmation of their receipt of my message, while he continued hounding me for weeks. Therecord of Bahai tyranny since 1970, on my website, documents that fundamentalist Bahais have gone from one attempt to another in the hope of silencing me and many, many others. ----- On January 30, 2000, I wrote to the uhj: A Bahai continues to harass me despite my polite requests that he cease emailing me his insults and threats. I hold the uhj directly responsible for the actions of this and other Bahai fanatics. The uhj routinely inspires this type of fundamentalism in my fellow Bahais and then uses them to suppress and control others. I shall be sending a copy of this message to the uhj along with the individual's name and email address. As a member of the Bahai faith since 1976, I have every right to express my conscience and beliefs as both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha guaranteed their followers.... -- Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.nbci.com/fglaysher/index.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: Bahá'í World Centre To: Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2000 11:09 AM Subject: RE: Bahai>>> Continuing Harassment Dear Friend, This is an automated acknowledgement. Your message has been received at the Bahá'í World Centre. Electronic Communications Operation, Bahá'í World Centre ----- When I asked him to desist, he spammed my account with a dozen copies of this message: >I will post you and I will stand behind everything I wrote............. One of his earlier messages was: > You have truly mastered the high-tech form of rhetorical masturbation. >You continue to post the things which seem to excite you the most to people >who don't really care what you are posting. It is a shame that you feel >that this has become such a deep seated motivation for so much of your time.I have heard all the drivel you are posting, before, and it has always come >from individuals who have had their hand slapped for one reason or another. >Get over it. The Baha'i Faith is divine and nothing you can say(mostly >imagination) can ever effect it in the least. You will never have the >opportunity to understand the significance of the UHJ or its members in >your lifetime. Jealousy takes all forms. Why not stick to an area of your >expertise and get out of this one? No one here cares anymore about you or >your fantasies. "Mark Elderkin" wrote in message news:JuXu4.20$1j4.2147@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net... > > > It was a common stratagem of the Soviets and > > their academic puppets in the West to smear > > the characters and reputations of people who > > had the courage and honesty to confront the reality > > of the use of terror and tyranny by Stalin and his > > ilk. > > > > Comparably speaking, it will require a great effort on > > the part of those interested in the truth about the > > current Bahai uhj if they are not to be misled by my > > fellow Bahais and their deceptions on talk.religion.bahai > > and elsewhere. > > It is nice to see that Fred can actually write a real posting here. Now if we can get Fred to quit cross-posting to people who don't want to here or see of him. I have an idea. I think Fred needs to quit hiding behind his > usual spam postings of Patrick Henry. So ..... here goes...... 'give me > liberty or, > give Fred a call: > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXX > and as you can see, I have cross-posted this to all of Fred Preselected > news-servers. Let your fingers do the walking. > Mark "Mark Elderkin" wrote in message news:hH1v4.125$1j4.6711@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net... > Pat and all others concerned, > I probably misstepped the guidelines by posting Freddys Facts ........ > but I think it will give Fred a chance to realize that he is not-so > anonomous anymore and might wish to quit cross-posting. I understand that > there are a lot of crazys out there that might not like the things he > regularly posts and now he can't hide behind his mothers dress. I have > posted my own phone number before and will always make myself available for > anyones input. Thanks. > Always Remember... Let your fingers do the walking. > Mark Path: sn-us!sn-xit-04!supernews.com!europa.netcrusader.net!128.230.129.106!news.ma xwell.syr.edu!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!nsw.nnrp.telstra.net!news.acay.com.a u!pmq.intercoast.com.au From: "Mark Elderkin" Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai References: Subject: Re: REPOST - Petition for a Bahai Reformation Lines: 12 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <3a96e1c0.0@news.acay.com.au> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:23:44 +1100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.27.214.6 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 982972465 203.27.214.6 (Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:54:25 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:54:25 EST Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct Xref: sn-us alt.religion.bahai:23378 talk.religion.bahai:21826 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Elderkin" Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 5:23 PM Subject: Re: REPOST - Petition for a Bahai Reformation > Fred, > I think it is about time you stop cross-posting to the others. They > assume you are a Baha'i and get pissed off at us. It's about time I get >out your address and phone number and I'll cross-post it here and >I'll make sure to include every interesting NG I can find. I was >presented with a list of para-military groups that have NGs and I'll >include those. I've done it before so don't feel I wouldn't again. You >need to realise that you are causing harm and we're tired of it. > MEE > " > > From secretariat@bwc.org Sat Feb 24 04:02:34 2001 Received: from [192.115.146.1] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBC60EDB9005D40043195C07392010EA73; Sat Feb 24 04:02:34 2001 Received: by bwcpo.bwc.org with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1W8X3S09>; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:49:08 +0200 Message-ID: <234FCCF3FAEFD21192270090271F45D80386EC2E@bwcpo003.bwc.org> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bah=E1=27=ED_World_Centre?= To: "'f_glaysher@hotmail.com'" Subject: RE: Bahais begin Offensive of Lies, Hate, Misrepresentations, Att acks Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:49:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bahá'í World Centre" To: Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: RE: Bahais begin Offensive of Lies, Hate, Misrepresentations, Attacks Dear Friend, This is an automated acknowledgement. Your message has been received at the Bahá'í World Centre. Electronic Communication Operations, Bahá'í World Centre ---------- Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.hom e.com!news.home.com!sjc1.nntp.concentric.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!newsfee d.ozemail.com.au!nsw.nnrp.telstra.net!news.acay.com.au!pmq.intercoast.com.au From: "Mark Elderkin" Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai References: Subject: Re: - bahai - Renewed Harassment Lines: 26 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <3a9ad12d.0@news.acay.com.au> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:02:26 +1100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.27.214.6 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 983224912 203.27.214.6 (Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:01:52 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:01:52 EST Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.religion.bahai:4515 talk.religion.bahai:21702 From: "Mark Elderkin" Subject: Re: - bahai - Renewed Harassment Date: Monday, February 26, 2001 5:02 PM Let's see.............. by harassment you mean I put your real phone number and address on ARB/TRB about a year ago. Yes I did that. NO regrets what-so-ever. I can only hope you heard from some of the people you continually spammed and cross-posted to. Grow up Glaysher.......... Your wimpy ranting here every other day have almost no merit. When I posted last year, a few told me that I had broken this and that rule and that it would put me in court and I would lose my ISP and on and on. Nothing at all occurred. ISP couldn't have cared...... No anything. And as far as inspiration I use the posts from other NGs who post here complaining about your antics. And if you think I care about my phone or address being posted here........... Mark Elderkin 43 Moruya Drive, Port Macquarie, NSW call international: 061265842150 I guess it all boils down to the issue of the morality of your actions.................. I don't mind taking responsibility for mine. MEE Nima, I would appreciate your forwarding his phone number and address to me at f_glaysher@hotmail.com Frederick Glaysher -------- Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!news.maxwell.syr.edu!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!ns w.nnrp.telstra.net!news.acay.com.au!pmq.intercoast.com.au From: "Mark Elderkin" Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai References: <3a9ad12d.0@news.acay.com.au> <905580C9Ddrwalkerfsandpcom@202.76.4.10> <97feei$mvl$1@gnamma.connect.com.au> <905588063drwalkerfsandpcom@202.76.4.10> <97g0do$seq$1@gnamma.connect.com.au> <3a9ba495@news-uk.onetel.net.uk> Subject: Re: - bahai - Renewed Harassment Lines: 13 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <3a9c5864.0@news.acay.com.au> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:51:41 +1100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.27.214.6 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 983325064 203.27.214.6 (Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:51:04 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:51:04 EST Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.religion.bahai:4526 talk.religion.bahai:21739 To all concerned.......... AS I see there has been more trash exposed, might I just set the record straight. I am not a Yank living in Australia but have been an Australian living in Australia since January 1992. Passport available on request. Now it might be asked as to why this is important to anyone other than myself and family but it does seem that it must be an issue for someone. If it was said to make a point then I'm afraid that the point is mute when it can be totally dismissed. I'm happy to live in and to be a 'fair-dinkum die' Australian. Cheers........MEE > >Mark is yank living in OZ, not an Aussie. -------- Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.hom e.com!news.home.com!sjc1.nntp.concentric.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!newsfee d.ozemail.com.au!nsw.nnrp.telstra.net!news.acay.com.au!203.32.99.25 From: "Mark Elderkin" Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,talk.religion.baha i,talk.religion.misc References: Subject: Re: { bahai } Why I Crosspost to Three Newsgroups Lines: 51 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <3a9ec8df.0@news.acay.com.au> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 09:16:08 +1100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.27.214.6 X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 983484931 203.27.214.6 (Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:15:31 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:15:31 EST Organization: Customer of Telstra Big Pond Direct Xref: uni-berlin.de alt.religion.bahai:4540 soc.culture.iranian:330979 soc.culture.israel:380858 talk.religion.bahai:21762 talk.religion.misc:496483 My dear Fred............ apparently you didn't take me seriously................. "Frederick Glaysher" wrote in message news:t9se9tkua39287@corp.supernews.com... > My crossposts to soc.culture.israel, soc.culture.iranian, > and talk.religion.misc are entirely within the acceptable > parameters for crossposting to newsgroups related to > the subject at hand: > > The bahai faith *began* in Iran in 1844, the major bahai > religious sites and institutions are *located *in *Israel*, > *all* religions may join discussion on talk.religion.misc, > and the unsuspecting public ought to be informed and > have the opportunity to judge and decide the facts for itself. > > It should be evident to any intelligent person that bahai > fundamentalists have a hidden agenda and their self-interest > in mind when they malign me and many, many other people on > talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, AOL, and elsewhere. > > Since fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have always relied > on their ability to operate one way in one country and another > elsewhere and the Internet now no longer makes that possible, as > dramatically demonstrated with the former USSR and China, > the universal house of "justice," like other totalitarian regimes, > will have to confront and answer for the consequences of their own > hypocrisy. Their slandering me for "spamming" also won't prevent > perceptive people from realizing what's really going on.... > > Those interested in judging independently for themselves my > background and whether I'm "unbalanced," as bahai fundamentalist > struggle to portray me, may do so by reading my Biographical Note: > https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm > > I believe it is my duty, bahai and otherwise, to inform my fellow > citizens, local and global, of the appalling and incessant hypocrisy > that lies behind the deceptive, progressive facade that the uhj so > often fobs off on the unsuspecting public.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > www.fglaysher.com > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.nbci.com/fglaysher/index.htm > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:03 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i Nima, Please, if you would, state briefly who the person involved was and lay out the basic situation. Thanks. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a4aush$2et$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > FYI > > > > August 1999 > > Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX > > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > U.S.A. > > Dear Baha'i Friend, > > The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 > to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, > signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of > Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is > Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write > as follows. > > A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed > during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a > significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and > seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's > activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own > creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of > the > Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your > relationship with the Baha'i Faith. > > As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including > those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a > member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, > Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers > of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to > Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by > the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess > as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your > actions would not again give cause for such intervention. > > It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the > arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the > promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an > illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been > a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of > Justice has asked us to address. > > Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and > publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone > questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to > purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would > be to seriously misconstrue > the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of > > Mr. XXXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 2 > > attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with > you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past > five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but > be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate > assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack > its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse > the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with > him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet > exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and > invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. > Cole, that is > scarcely credible in rational discourse. > > Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a > disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of > Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no > more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a > religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this > context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the > Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable > Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine > Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising > it. > > As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion > groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested > scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was > in > preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent > twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on > his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i > community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium > represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running > scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. > > What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of > Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on > speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run > somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially > one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to > the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of > rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other > contemporary developments. > Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to > various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even > "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was > able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been > "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather > than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and > movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of > religious exclusivity > in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical > experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". > > As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation > of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his > objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an > objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your > behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized > involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to > foist this caricature of > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 3 > > the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with > their purpose. > > The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, > has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's > book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge > the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of > Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative > interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions > being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the > Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this > opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad > authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the > Master's Will and Testament. (In > Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: > namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission > because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured > by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized > the members of the Universal House of Justice.) > > Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to > advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in > Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that > a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an > indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an > effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, > scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause > of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably > derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently > ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention > and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? > > Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly > emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue > raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no > reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly > scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. > Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a > work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and > disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in > themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual > standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose > interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. > > The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a > group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged > access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the > Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the > case > with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and > your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of > purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise > the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, > frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 4 > > The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the > questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the > relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will > and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and > sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to > show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, > straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the > world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel > all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield > the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as > these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to > produce contrary results"? > > The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's > loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so > precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the > House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on > which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady > spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this > world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct > concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with > Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so > immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your > moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents > of this present letter. > > In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should > have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of > Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and > that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you > have, alas, been pursuing. > > The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you > will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you > face. > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > Department of the Secretariat > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:05 AM Subject: soc.religion.bahai CENSORSHIP soc.religion.bahai CENSORSHIP https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb.htm Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998:"So many Bahais on these forumshave shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence."https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/censored2.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb.htm -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:25 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i My review of Professor Juan Cole's brilliant and insightful reading of the interaction of the Manifestation of God for our time with His historical period and its impact upon His Revelation: Respecting the Conscience of Man.... June 27, 2000 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of censorship, "Bahai review," that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at the University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriarchy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth-century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) Cole himself and many others have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai on Usenet for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. Both my and Cole's websites provide essential documentation along these lines. It should be noted that the Universal House of Justice has actively worked through the BCCA (Bahai Computer and Communications Association) to suppress all links to websites with other than its own "comprehensive" point of view on such major portals as Yahoo.com, Excite.com, and other search engines. The UHJ has gone even further by advising Bahais to remove any link whatsoever to Professor Cole's website. As a Bahai since 1976, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. Professor Cole's Modernity and the Millennium will remain, for many years to come, the most important book available on the Baha'i Faith. His discussion of its historical development within the intellectual milieu of progressive 19th Century thought is particularly brilliant and insightful. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a4aush$2et$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > FYI > > > > August 1999 > > Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX > > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXX > U.S.A. > > Dear Baha'i Friend, > > The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 > to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, > signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of > Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is > Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write > as follows. > > A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed > during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a > significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and > seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's > activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own > creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of > the > Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your > relationship with the Baha'i Faith. > > As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including > those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a > member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, > Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers > of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to > Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by > the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess > as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your > actions would not again give cause for such intervention. > > It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the > arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the > promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an > illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been > a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of > Justice has asked us to address. > > Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and > publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone > questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to > purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would > be to seriously misconstrue > the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of > > Mr. XXXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 2 > > attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with > you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past > five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but > be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate > assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack > its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse > the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with > him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet > exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and > invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. > Cole, that is > scarcely credible in rational discourse. > > Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a > disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of > Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no > more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a > religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this > context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the > Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable > Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine > Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising > it. > > As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion > groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested > scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was > in > preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent > twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on > his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i > community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium > represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running > scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. > > What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of > Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on > speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run > somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially > one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to > the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of > rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other > contemporary developments. > Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to > various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even > "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was > able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been > "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather > than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and > movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of > religious exclusivity > in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical > experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". > > As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation > of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his > objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an > objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your > behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized > involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to > foist this caricature of > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 3 > > the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with > their purpose. > > The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, > has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's > book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge > the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of > Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative > interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions > being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the > Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this > opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad > authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the > Master's Will and Testament. (In > Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: > namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission > because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured > by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized > the members of the Universal House of Justice.) > > Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to > advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in > Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that > a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an > indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an > effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, > scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause > of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably > derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently > ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention > and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? > > Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly > emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue > raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no > reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly > scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. > Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a > work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and > disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in > themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual > standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose > interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. > > The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a > group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged > access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the > Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the > case > with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and > your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of > purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise > the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, > frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > August 1999 > Page > 4 > > The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the > questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the > relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will > and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and > sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to > show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, > straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the > world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel > all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield > the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as > these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to > produce contrary results"? > > The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's > loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so > precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the > House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on > which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady > spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this > world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct > concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with > Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so > immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your > moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents > of this present letter. > > In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should > have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of > Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and > that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you > have, alas, been pursuing. > > The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you > will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you > face. > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > Department of the Secretariat > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:37 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i Thank you. So it was Kalimat or One World, the former, I suppose, and concerned the editor there, Anthony A. Lee. https://www.kalimat.com/ How pathetic that anyone on the uhj could ever have imagined that Cole and Lee deserved such contemptible treatment.... I merely link to Cole's webpage copy: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a4b1d9$3vl$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > I am not obliged to disclose the identity of the person(s). But the > circumstances can be gleaned quite easily from the letter itself. A Baha'i > publisher had a contract with Columbia University Press to distribute Cole's > book. They advertised and distributed the book to Baha'is via their mailing > list, etc. The nsa immediately clamped down on the publisher ordering it to > stop from both advertising and distributing the book. The publisher wrote > the uhj. The full text of the response from the uhj is what you just saw. > > This letter is the smoking gun proving, on the one hand, the fascistic > heights the Baha'i administration has can rise to from time to time, and > demonstrating how the BAO behaves as an abusive cult leadership would > towards its rank and file members, on the other. > > Incidentally, if you remember, Maneck once claimed that Cole had doctored > the sections of this letter that is on your webpage. This is the letter in > full proving once and for all that the stooges of the AO themselves are the > liars. > > -- > Freethought110 > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:a4b0fe$1ddtmb$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Nima, > > > > Please, if you would, state briefly who the person involved > > was and lay out the basic situation. Thanks. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > news:a4aush$2et$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > > > FYI > > > > > > > > > > > > August 1999 > > > > > > Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX > > > > > > XXXXXXXXXXX > > > XXXXXXXXXXX > > > XXXXXXXXXXX > > > XXXXXXXXXXX > > > U.S.A. > > > > > > Dear Baha'i Friend, > > > > > > The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May > 1999 > > > to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, > > > signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of > > > Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to > > Baha'is > > > Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to > > write > > > as follows. > > > > > > A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably > directed > > > during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a > > > significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and > > > seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of > > VVVVV's > > > activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own > > > creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House > > of > > > the > > > Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding > > your > > > relationship with the Baha'i Faith. > > > > > > As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including > > > those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, > a > > > member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your > wife, > > > Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious > > dangers > > > of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed > > to > > > Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen > by > > > the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you > > profess > > > as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your > > > actions would not again give cause for such intervention. > > > > > > It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the > > > arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the > > > promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as > > an > > > illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long > > been > > > a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of > > > Justice has asked us to address. > > > > > > Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and > > > publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone > > > questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to > > > purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise > > would > > > be to seriously misconstrue > > > the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem > > of > > > > > > Mr. XXXXXXX 3 > > > August 1999 > > > Page > > > 2 > > > > > > attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise > with > > > you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the > past > > > five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but > > > be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate > > > assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to > attack > > > its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to > abuse > > > the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged > > with > > > him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same > Internet > > > exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny > and > > > invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of > > Dr. > > > Cole, that is > > > scarcely credible in rational discourse. > > > > > > Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a > > > disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of > > > Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented > no > > > more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a > > > religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in > > this > > > context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the > > > Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to > knowledgeable > > > Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of > genuine > > > Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in > > devising > > > it. > > > > > > As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion > > > groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a > > disinterested > > > scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book > was > > > in > > > preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an > > apparent > > > twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt > on > > > his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i > > > community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the > Millennium > > > represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running > > > scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. > > > > > > What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion > of > > > Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by > reliance > > on > > > speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run > > > somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent > > essentially > > > one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" > to > > > the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of > > > rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and > > other > > > contemporary developments. > > > Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to > > > various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", > even > > > "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author > > was > > > able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been > > > "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather > > > than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers > > and > > > movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of > > > religious exclusivity > > > in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical > > > experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". > > > > > > As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the > > interpretation > > > of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his > > > objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an > > > objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about > > your > > > behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized > > > involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek > to > > > foist this caricature of > > > > > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > > > August 1999 > > > Page > > > 3 > > > > > > the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification > with > > > their purpose. > > > > > > The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's > > Revelation, > > > has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. > > Cole's > > > book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to > acknowledge > > > the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of > > > Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such > > authoritative > > > interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the > > notions > > > being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the > > > Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this > > > opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad > > > authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the > > > Master's Will and Testament. (In > > > Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: > > > namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission > > > because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow > captured > > > by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly > characterized > > > the members of the Universal House of Justice.) > > > > > > Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted > to > > > advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of > believers > > in > > > Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that > > > a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an > > > indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How > could > > an > > > effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, > > > scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the > > Cause > > > of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could > > conceivably > > > derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose > > apparently > > > ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of > contention > > > and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by > him? > > > > > > Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so > > strongly > > > emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual > issue > > > raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no > > > reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly > > > scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly > qualifications. > > > Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a > > > work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and > > > disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in > > > themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual > > > standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith > > whose > > > interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. > > > > > > The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose > motivating > > a > > > group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged > > > access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of > > the > > > Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt > > the > > > case > > > with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you > and > > > your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of > > > purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you > > advise > > > the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the > > situation, > > > frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. > > > > > > Mr. XXXXXX 3 > > > August 1999 > > > Page > > > 4 > > > > > > The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the > > > questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the > > > relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His > Will > > > and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and > > > sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded > to > > > show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, > > > straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of > the > > > world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, > > counsel > > > all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to > > shield > > > the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as > > > these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to > > > produce contrary results"? > > > > > > The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with > > GGGG's > > > loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that > > so > > > precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the > > > House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course > on > > > which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady > > > spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this > > > world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of > direct > > > concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion > with > > > Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so > > > immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your > > > moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the > > contents > > > of this present letter. > > > > > > In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions > > should > > > have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House > > of > > > Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake > and > > > that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course > > you > > > have, alas, been pursuing. > > > > > > The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that > > you > > > will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you > > > face. > > > > > > > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > > > > > Department of the Secretariat > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 7:43 AM Subject: Re: Cowardice of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0202121705.783a0693@posting.google.com... > > If Baha'i institutions were functioning in an unhelpful way that > contradicted the intentions of the Holy Figures, it was my > responsibility as an academic and an intellectual to point it out. > The idea, which Birkland and his controllers in Haifa put forward, > that such a critique is a form of covenant breaking, is so bizarre and > so totalitarian as to cast into doubt the thoroughness of my initial > critique. "This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise be to God!--this is a house of worship [Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912] wherein conscientious opinion has free sway. Every religion and every religious aspiration may be freely voiced and expressed here. Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought, likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable. Therefore, this is a blessed church because its pulpit is open to every religion, the ideals of which may be set forth with openness and freedom." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u6jele4bi93984@corp.supernews.com... > > I can't even begin to tell you how repulsed I was when I first read this > letter. Not only are they putting pressure on a publisher not to promote a > very worthwhile book, they are making statements about the publisher's > spiritual state because he dares consider it, and threatening him. Nothing > condemns the institutions so much as the words they produce themselves. > Reading that letter is like looking into the very face of evil. Those unfamiliar with it, might compare Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive letter in 1997 to me the morning of the first vote for talk.religion.bahai with this one regarding Cole. I suggest the tactics are essentially the same: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 7:57 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i Maneck and the other fundamentalist sophists have used this tactic for years............. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Michael McKenny" wrote in message news:a4dl8e$ecv$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... > Greetings, Alma. > Yep. That's what puzzles the non Cultic mindset. It's just like you > had a letter in which a signatory admits to raping someone, and there's > discussion in support of the rapist and trying to pin guilt on the > reporters who made the dirty deed public. Which reporter made the event > public knowledge, which reporter got the name of the victim in the media, > whether a reporter was correct in saying the rapist boasted about the rape > to a number of people afterwards or not is not the central issue; the > central issue is the rape itself. > The letter per se is the issue, and unless you've been brainwashed to > support vile deeds by leadership, you'd have no difficulty spotting such > vile deeds and knowing them for what they are. > As I said, heat without water equals desert. > To Spiritual Principles, > To Freedom From Oppression, > To Women on the Universal House of Justice, Michael. > > "Alma Engels" (aelyria@earthlink.net) writes: > > Can you tell me Susan why you and others are more interested in proving Juan > > Cole guilty of something or other than in the contents of the letter? Don't > > you find them important? > > > > Alma > > Happily retired > > This line available for advertising - contact me if you want to discuss > > terms. > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 8:26 AM Subject: Re: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i This letter was written by the uhj to apparently Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press: https://www.kalimat.com/ Now available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship FYI August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 9:08 AM Subject: ESSENTIAL READING - KALIMAT PRESS - FULL TEXT - uhj's COERCION of CONSCIENCE This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. For the uninformed, it should be noted beforehand that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 11:38 AM Subject: Re: An Old Lie Aired Out (was: Nature of the Beast: UHJ Letter To An Individual Baha'i) "Michael McKenny" wrote in message news:a4dvua$rpl$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... > Susan, Susan, Susan, > Everyone would have had, as they still have, a reason to complain. > This letter is despicable, atrocious, vile and evil. It calls out for > the indignation, repulsion and opposition of every principled spiritual > being whose eyes are blighted by its odious presence. > To Freedom From Oppression, > To Spiritual Principles, > To Women on the Universal House of Justice, Michael. And ALL of that applies to the uhj that wrote, in my opinion.... https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 12:13 PM Subject: ESSENTIAL READING - US bahais READ THIS!!! ESSENTIAL READING - US bahais READ THIS!!! ESSENTIAL READING - US bahais READ THIS!!! ESSENTIAL READING - US bahais READ THIS!!! This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 12:15 PM Subject: ESSENTIAL READING - What MUSLIMS & HINDUS need to know about bahai in the US and elsewhere This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 12:17 PM Subject: ESSENTIAL READING - What JEWS & MUSLIMS ought to know about the bahai faith in Haifa, Israel, USA, & elsewhere This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 12:19 PM Subject: ESSENTIAL READING - What Christians, Catholics ought to know about the bahai faith in USA & elsewhere This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 8:06 AM Subject: Re: How many Artifical Assemblies in BF? "Alma Engels" wrote in message news:L7La8.7478$P21.699317@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... >If the Persian Baha'is (or > any other group of Baha'is for that matter) try to have the local people > adjust to their way of doing things rather than blending in, then we will > soon have a uniformity and not the varied garden of flowers Abdu'l Baha > wanted. Alma, The term "Persian Bahais" is inaccurate, as a point of fact. Persia does not exist and has not for many, many decades. The people to whom you refer are Iranian bahais and share, by all indications, the widely recognized national characteristics of their homeland. And THAT is the core of much of their problem in communities here in the USA. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:19 AM Subject: FULL TEXT - uhj coerces KALIMAT PRESS, THREATENS EDITOR'S Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm For the uninformed, it should be noted, beforehand, that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais, that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience and some family members to cease associating with siblings, children, and parents. The full text below also available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----------------- August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 7:41 AM Subject: FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S Fortress of Well-Being - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S Fortress of Well-Being - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm For the uninformed, it should be noted, beforehand, that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais, that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience and some family members to cease associating with siblings, children, and parents. The full text below also available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----------------- August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 7:42 AM Subject: FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S Fortress of Well-Being - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm For the uninformed, it should be noted, beforehand, that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais, that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience and some family members to cease associating with siblings, children, and parents. The full text below also available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----------------- August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 7:55 AM Subject: bahai - Slandering & Backbiting US Academics - bahai - Slandering & Backbiting US Academics - bahai - Slandering & Backbiting US Academics - bahai - Slandering & Backbiting US Academics - As a sample of the extreme views opposing free speech and academic freedom held by the uhj and its fundamentalists on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere, see below the text of the uhj's letter circulated behind Cole's back, slandering and backbiting him within the bahai community. There have now been many American bahai academics who have received this type of treatment and been driven out of the bahai faith in one way or another, a fact the uhj seeks to conceal from the United Nations and US government officials. For Cole's comments and response, see this link: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---- 3 August 1999 From: Department of the Secretariat Baha'i World Center Dear Baha'i Friend, Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern . . . As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse thetrust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internetexchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own" . . . The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge theappointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) . . . With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 5:50 PM Subject: Re: Baha'i Authorities Tamper with primary sources about Baha'u'llah Appalling.... After more than five years of incidents like this one coming to light, I can't say I'm surprised, just further appalled.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0202181122.3e07b73@posting.google.com... > This is dedicated to Pat Kohli. More to come. > > cheers Juan > > > ------------------- > > Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 > (February 2002) > > https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol6/salmuhj.htm > > see also > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > The Censorship of Salmani's Memoirs by the Baha'i Authorities: > Historical Documents from 1982 > > From materials in the private collections of Juan R. I. Cole > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE > > > > BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > > > > > > > Department of the Secretariat > > > > 20 > September 1982 > > > > > > > > Kalimat Press > > 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, > > Suite 270 Los Angeles, > > California 90024 > > U.S.A. > > > > Dear Baha’i Friends, > > > > On 31 August 1982 the Universal House of Justice received a letter > from Mr. Juan Cole expressing concern aver a number of points > connected with its decision that certain passages, of the Salmani > memoirs should not be published at this time. Shortly afterwards it > was informed that Mr. . . . was also writing on this subject, and it > decided to await the arrival of his letter before replying. However, > Mr. Roger White has now shared with the House of Justice extracts from > a personal letter he has received from Mr. . . . , and it has > instructed us to send you the following clarification and comments > without further delay. > > > > As you will recall from the letter we wrote to you on behalf of the > Universal House of Justice on 19 August 1980, the special committee > that the National Spiritual Assembly of' the United States had been > asked to appoint to review Persian manuscripts was also given the > responsibility of advising on the timeliness and wisdom of publishing > such texts. The House of Justice then presumed that the Salmani > memoirs were going through this process. In June 1982, however, one of > the friends wrote to the House of Justice expressing his great concern > at learning that the entire text of the Salmani memoirs was being > copied out with the intent of publishing them. On receipt of this > letter an enquiry was immediately made by telephone to Mr. > Darakhshani, the secretary of the recently appointed reviewing > committee for Persian publications, and he was asked to draw to your > attention the unwisdom of publishing the book in full at this time. > This was confirmed in a letter to Mr. Darakhshani on 30 June 1982. > > > > Your two cables of 1 and 15 July then arrived informing the House of > Justice that, not only had the book been passed by review of both the > Persian original and the English translation, but that it was actually > > > > /Cont'd.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kalimat Press > > 20 September 1982 > > Los Angeles, California > > Page two > > > > > > at the printers. Realizing the urgency of the matter and aware that, > apparently, the earlier committee appointed by the National Spiritual > Assembly had not appreciated the problems of timeliness presented by > this publication, the House of Justice instructed an ad hoc committee > to immediately identify those few passages which were objectionable > and to send them post‑haste to Mr. Darakhshani so that the > proofs could be corrected and the printing go forward. > > > > The House of Justice greatly regrets that it had to intervene at the > last minute in this way, and since it is clear that Kalimat Press had > faithfully followed all the requirements for review, the House of > Justice will pay the additional costs incurred as a result of the > last‑minute changes. > > > > In addition to the general question, Mr. Cole in his letter has > queried the reason for the excision of a number of passages. At the > moment the House of Justice has before it only the original Persian > manuscript, therefore it would appreciate your sending at your > earliest convenience a copy of the typescript or proofs of the book, > showing both the Persian and the English and whatever notes and > footnotes you have added, so that it can consider the passages in > detail and reply to the points that Mr. Cole has raised. > > > > > > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > > > Loraine Kerfoot > > > > For Department of the Secretariat > > > > > > cc: The National Spiritual of the United States , > > Mr. Juan Cole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE > > BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > > > Department of the Secretariat > > > > > 2 December 1982 > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Department of Medieval and > > Modern History > > Lucknow University > > Lucknow 226007 > > India > > > > Dear Baha'i Friend, > > > > > > The Universal House of Justice has now been able to compare the > published edition of the Salmani memoirs with the Persian manuscript: > and to consider the passages which the ad hoc committee had marked for > deletion. It is clear that Kalimat Press scrupulously followed all the > provisions for review of this book before publication, but, > unfortunately the process has been dogged by a series of' > misunderstandings and confusions. The House of Justice has instructed > us to send you the following comments on the points raised in your > letter of 13 August 1982. > > > > When the early correspondence took place between the World Centre and > Kalimat Press concerning this publication, the House of Justice was > relying on the discretion of the appropriate committee in the United > States to check not only the normal review aspects, but also the > timeliness and wisdom of such a publication. It did not itself check > the manuscript. If it had done so it now concludes that it would not > have given permission for its publication or translation at this time, > for reasons which will be explained below. > > > > In June 1982, concern was expressed to the Universal House of Justice > about the possible publication in full, in Persian, of these memoirs, > and action was taken in July, in great haste, to eliminate the most > harmful passages so that the publication of the book, which was > already at the press, could proceed. Unfortunately at that time the ad > hoc committee was unaware of the earlier correspondence and of the > fact that certain passages had already been quoted in translation in > books by Mr. Hasan Balyuzi and Mr. Adib Taherzadeh. > > > > Kalimat Press, in its turn, knowing of the prior publication of these > passages, and not understanding the reasons for the proposed > deletions, has, in fact, retained the larger part of the objectionable > passages. The publication is a fait accompli and the House of Justice > has therefore decided to permit it to stand, but not to) permit the > publication of the Persian text which, in fact, would be more damaging > than the English version. > > > > Cont'd/.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > Page 2 > > > > To the points of substance which you have raised concerning the > publication of historical texts, the House of Justice instructs us to > explain the following > > > > > > In order to preserve basic information and historical > materials for the use of future historians, the beloved Guardian > instructed the communities throughout Iran to record the history of > the Faith in their localities, and also gave instructions for the > memoirs of a number of early believers to be written down and > preserved. This was not a new advice and many friends, eyewitnesses of > certain events, in the lives of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l‑Baha, > had already committed their reminiscences to writing. The memoirs of > Ustad Muhammad‑`Aliy‑i‑Salmani are among, these and > were written down from his spoken recollections in his old age. There > is no question whatsoever of suppressing such records ‑ on the > contrary, the whole purpose of having them made was to preserve them, > and they have been made available to Baha'i historians, such as Mr. > Balyuzi and Mr. Taherzadeh for use in their work. When excerpts are > translated and published in such works, they are placed in context, > related to other records and, where necessary, annotated and commented > on. You will readily agree that such a use is not the same as > publication in full, even if supplementary footnotes are added, and > > does not carry the same implications. . > > > > In time entire collections of early documents of the Faith will be > published in scholarly editions for general use. An initial step in > suclbrl a process is Dr. Moojan Momen's admirable book "The Babi and > Baha’i Religions, 1.844‑1944 ‑ Some Contemporary > Western Accounts". Additional considerations, however, have to be > weighed in publishing texts by Baha'i writers. > > > > At the present time the general public, even if it has heard of the > Faith, is largely uninformed or misinformed. An increasing amount of > misinformation is continually being disseminated by opponents of the > Faith, both in the east and in the west. The principal task of the > Baha’is at the present time ‑ and especially of > Baha’i scholars ‑ is to present a true picture of the > Faith to the general public and to relate the Baha’i teachings > to the concerns and problems of mankind. When a Baha'i publishing > house issues a translation of a document such as Salmani's memoirs, > the implication to an average reader is that the Baha’is > consider this particular account worthy of publication, and, in the > absence of adequate footnotes or commentary to the contrary, the > reader will assume that Salmani's actions and statements are approved > by Baha’is and are accurate portrayals of the Faith. After all, > Salmani was a close companion of Baha’u’llah, comparable > in the eyes of a Christian reader with one of the early disciples of > Christ. > > > > Viewed in this light, certain of Salmani's accounts are misleading or > > > > Cont'd/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Page 3 > > > > unworthy and, apart from distorting the Faith for the average reader > can provide material for the enemies of the Faith who at the present > time are seizing every opportunity to attack the Cause and blacken its > reputation. > > > > To take a few examples from the passages queried by the ad hoc > committee: > > > > p. 17. There is a brief account of some believers from Sultanabad > saying to Baha'u'llah "You being God, Uncle, why do You give us such a > hard row to hoe?" It is an old accusation against the Baha’is, > especially from Muslims, that we regard Baha'u'llah as God. To print > such a story without an appropriate commentary gives fuel to our > Muslim enemies and makes the Faith look ridiculous to a western > reader. Unfortunately Kalimat Press, not realizing the reason for the > objection, let the objectionable part stand and deleted a > parenthetical comment "The Shi`is, however, were very hostile", which > is entirely innocuous. > > > p.30. There are some virtually incomprehensible comments about Mirza > Aqa Jan’s head, which are of no historical importance but are > unpleasant and unworthy. > > > 3. pp. 31‑34. There are three unpleasant stories > recounted by Salmani to illustrate Azal's gluttony. Shoghi Effendi was > always very careful in his accounts of Azal to confine his strictures > to his truly infamous conduct. He never stooped to making personal > criticisms of such a nature, which are unworthy , Publication of such > stories in the context of an annotated edition of a historical > document for scholarly study is one thing; publication in a book for > the general reader is quite another. Again, unfortunately, Kalimat > Press did not appreciate the reason for the committee's objection and > published the whole passage apart from a couple of brief deletions > which were of no significance. > > > > 3. p. 34. There is the account. of a disagreement between > Baha'u’llah and Azal over the shaving of Azal’s son's > head‑another unworthy story, the point of which is obscure. > > > > There are others of a similar character. > > > > The passages which have already been published in translation, such as > Azal's attempt to persuade Salmani to murder Baha'u'llah, provide > striking examples of the profound difference between publication in > the context of a properly balanced historical exposition, and > publication as unadorned parts of a narrative. > > > > In sum, to a knowledgeable Baha’i reader, Salmani’s > memoirs are a graphic illustration of the overwhelming problems with > which Baha'u'llah had to deal both from His enemies and because of the > actions of some of His own > > > > Cont'd/ .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Page 4 > > > > > > faithful followers; but to an uninformed reader they give a misleading > and distorted picture of the Faith and of Baha'u'llah Himself. > > > > With loving Baha’i greetings, > > > > Loraine Kerfoot > > > > For Department of the Secretariat > > > > cc: The International Teaching Centre > > National Assembly of the United States > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Excerpts from contemporaneous responses to the UHJ letter to J. Cole > from other Baha’i intellectuals who saw it: > > > > 1) Firuz Kazemzadeh, member of the National Spiritual > Assembly of the U.S. and Yale historian, was extremely upset about the > tampering with a primary source and offered to write a letter of > support for Kalimat Press in the affair. > > > > 2) Professor Amin Banani of UCLA, who had written the > introduction to the Salmani memoir, insisted that his name be removed > from the introduction because he declined to be associated with a > censored document. > > > > 3) Another intellectual observed the following: > > > > It is simply untrue to suppose that the average > reader is incapable of distinguishing between the statements and > actions of an individual believer and the official positions of the > institutions of the Faith. This is an elementary distinction of the > kind which is made every day by persons in all walks of life. This > must be particularly true of a manuscript of personal memoirs which is > over seventy years old. Using the House's example of the early > disciples of Christ, many of their failings and misunderstandings are > clearly recorded in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. > Christians (or others) do not automatically assume that these > shortcomings are approved by modern Churches or are accurate > portrayals of Christian standards. What sane reader of the Gospels > would propose that since Peter denied Christ three times or because he > used his sword to sever the ear of a Roman soldier in the garden of > Gethsemane, these must be Christian teachings or approved examples of > Christian conduct? > > > > If anything, the current policies of review which the House is > applying will serve to blur what would otherwise be a perfectly > obvious distinction. Since the House now insists that any published > personal memoirs, or other statements of personal opinion on the Faith > by Baha'is, must actually reflect official policy and contain no > statements or reminiscences that run counter to present practice the > argument that any individual opinion constitutes official policy > (which would otherwise appear absurd) gains some force. Of course, it > is just the opposite impression. which the House wants to make. > > > > For instance, the only reason that anyone might > suppose that Salmani's particular account of Baha'u'llah's exiles > might be considered by Baha'is_to be of some special significance is > that it is the only one that has been allowed in print. If there were > several personal accounts of this kind available, from different > points of view, the notion that Salmani's memoir is somehow special > would be held by no one. . . > > > > The letter to Juan Cole states that Salmani's account was published > without footnotes or commentary. Both were provided in > [Kalimat’s] edition . . . > > > > The intention of the House to protect the reputation of the Faith is > certainly to be appreciated, but it seems clear that this reputation > is more likely to be blackened by present policies of strict > censorship than by anything in the Salmani memoirs—not only for > non‑Baha'is, but also for loyal believers who find such policies > difficult to understand Moreover, such policies play right into the > hands of critics of the Faith (such as Denis MacEoin in England) who > are hard at work to portray the Faith as an anti‑democratic, > totalitarian, rigidly authoritarian religion, which has falsified and > distorted its own history. > > > > To addresss the specific objections of the ad hoc committee: > > > > 2. It is clear that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be the > Godhead, and this can be conclusively demonstrated by reference to His > own Writings. On the other hand, it is also clear that there were many > Baha'is who believed that He was. (And there certainly still are!) > Numerous references in the published works of E. G. Browne indicate > this clearly. This could easily be proven, by any scholar who bothered > to try. So, the offending sentence in Salmani's memoirs adds nothing > to what is not already known. > > Furthermore, Baha'is know that in a certain sense we > believe that Baha'u'llah is God, as is explained in the Iqan. > > Especially since the incident is not without humor, was > intended as an amusing story, and involves an ignorant villager (and > in the context: of the introduction of the book), it seems unlikely > that it would fuel our enemies or make us seem ridiculous. > > > > 2. The comments which Salmani makes about Mirza Aqa Jan's head are > admittedly curious. However, I would query the statement that they are > of nc historical importance. If we could understand what the comments > meant they may be of great interest. Salmani was, after all, a > barber, and he may have recorded something about Mirza Aqa Jan's head > that others have failed to mention. > > > > 3 & 4. The truly extraordinary standard for forbidding the publication > of passages‑‑that they are "unpleasant" or "unworthy" > ‑‑appears to establish a new standard for the review of > materials which was not used by the Guardian, or previously used by > the House of Justice. Such a new standard raises many questions: > > Salmani can hardly have been expected to conform to standards of > style and choice of material found in the Guardian's writings, since > he was writing before the Guardian began his ministry. Beyond this, > there.mu8t be room in Baha'i literature for different kinds of books. > Not all can be similar to the works of Shoghi Effendi. In this case, > we were publishing the personal memories and pilgrim's notes of an > illiterate barber. It is certainly unfair to compare them to the > writings of the Guardian. > > The objection that a particular passage is "unpleasant" or if > unworthy" is extremely vague. It is difficult to see how a reviewing > committee could be expected to apply such a standard. It could provide > license to forbid the publication of almost anything. > > The other question, of course, is “impleasant" to whom? I > do not find anything in the memoirs unpleasant or unworthy of > publication. Neither did the translator, or the author of the > introduction to the book. Nor did two Separate reviewing committee of > the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, one Persian and > one American, find anything of this kind in the manuscript. > > > > Concerning Azal's plot to murder Baha'u'llah‑‑the > descriptions of which the ad‑hoc committee felt should not be > included in the translation of Salmani's memoirs, since these > descriptions had already been published in translation in two separate > books published by George Ronald, it would have been truly remarkable > to omit them from a translation of the memoirs as a whole. It was > impossible for me to understand how such a request could be justified. > > > > The letter of the House of Justice states that there is no question of > suppressing records such as Salmani's memoirs. The dictionary defines > the word suppress as: "2: to keep from public knowledge: as a: to > keep secret b: to stop or prohibit the publica­tion or revelation of." > There can be little argument that the House of Justice intends to > suppress certain parts of Salmani's memoirs. That it does not intend > to do so forever is encouraging, but it does not change the current > condition under which Baha'i publishers must operate. Nor will the > intention to release such information in the future protect us much > from the attacks of scholars or other critics who wish to criticize us > on this point. > > > > > > 4) Juan Cole wrote the UHJ on 9 January 1983 in New Delhi: > > > > I remain convinced that the policy outlined by the Universal House of > Justice is an unfortunate one and that time will prove it incorrect. > At that point, I am sure that the Supreme Institution will, on the > basis of further information and considerations, abandon its current > stance. > > > > I firmly believe that it is essentially dishonest to > delete passages from manuscripts when they are published, whether in > the original or in translation, and no matter how temporarily. I feel > that it is also morally wrong for a public institution to withhold > documents, particularly ones over thirty years old, from scrutiny by > the public. Because I believe that such acts are wrong in principle, > no particular justifications for them can strike me as wholly > convincing. I further fear that such a policy of secretiveness and > bowdlerization will inevitably besmirch the fair name of the Faith of > Baha'u'llah. > > > > I am convinced that the Baha'i Faith has nothing to fear from the > historical records that have survived the nineteenth century. It, is > too sublime, too true to ever be sullied by anything mere human beings > have written or done, We Baha’is should face the historical > record, not with fear, dissimulation and blue pencils, but with > unshakeable certitude of the purity of our Cause. > > > > > > > > > > Final note: The example given by the UHJ of historical accounts being > allowed to be published was Moojan Momen’s The Babi and > Baha’i Religions: Some Contemporary Western Accounts (Oxford: > George Ronald, 1980). In fact, this book was also censored and > important material in the British Archives that the editor had planned > to include was taken out at the UHJ’s insistence. > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > Return to Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi, and Baha'i Movements > > Return to H-Bahai Digital Publications > > Return to H-Bahai Home Page > > Links to pages with similar resources ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:44 AM Subject: Re: Note to newcomers to Unmoderated Bahai Newsgroups "Recently, Maneck, A.K.A. LDRS LFST Shahid on America Online's Baha'i Faith Bulletin Board posted the following." What may be expected from such bahai community leaders on AOL may be judged from Ms. Maneck's past treatment of opinions other than her own: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm See her slandering other views as garbage: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck3.htm See her slandering other views as litter: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck7.htm See also messages related to her abuse of her AOL "position" : https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOLcensorship.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOLcensorship1.htm Continuing AOL Censorship by bahais March 2001 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL2001.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:a4sa9h$2osul$3@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > Newcomers to these groups are advised to treat any posts by a Susan > Maneck, also known as the Diagonal Steam Trap, with great caution. > This person is not the intellectual power house she deigns to present > herself as. She has continually found herself bettered in argument by > certain posters here to the extent that she has "kill-filed" them. > > You are therefore advised to note with particular regard posts by > Michael McKenny who has persistently presented questions and arguments > that this dear lady has been unable to satisfactorily answer or > refute. His argument should therefore be accorded a higher status in > your thinking as it cannot be authoritatively refuted by she who is > commonly regarded as the voice of the Adminisrative Order here. > > You are also advised to treat posts by the author of this message in > the same regard. Not only has he been kill-filed but also awarded the > epithet of "spiritually corrosive" - the highest award bestowed by the > Administrative Order on a non-Bahai who successfully presents an > irrefutable case against it. > > This post shall be repeated at regular intervals for the benefit of > newcomers. > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:51 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Authorities Tamper with primary sources about Baha'u'llah Appalling.... After more than five years of incidents like this one coming to light, I can't say I'm surprised, just further appalled.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0202181122.3e07b73@posting.google.com... > This is dedicated to Pat Kohli. More to come. > > cheers Juan > > > ------------------- > > Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 > (February 2002) > > https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol6/salmuhj.htm > > see also > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > The Censorship of Salmani's Memoirs by the Baha'i Authorities: > Historical Documents from 1982 > > From materials in the private collections of Juan R. I. Cole > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE > > > > BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > > > > > > > Department of the Secretariat > > > > 20 > September 1982 > > > > > > > > Kalimat Press > > 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, > > Suite 270 Los Angeles, > > California 90024 > > U.S.A. > > > > Dear Baha’i Friends, > > > > On 31 August 1982 the Universal House of Justice received a letter > from Mr. Juan Cole expressing concern aver a number of points > connected with its decision that certain passages, of the Salmani > memoirs should not be published at this time. Shortly afterwards it > was informed that Mr. . . . was also writing on this subject, and it > decided to await the arrival of his letter before replying. However, > Mr. Roger White has now shared with the House of Justice extracts from > a personal letter he has received from Mr. . . . , and it has > instructed us to send you the following clarification and comments > without further delay. > > > > As you will recall from the letter we wrote to you on behalf of the > Universal House of Justice on 19 August 1980, the special committee > that the National Spiritual Assembly of' the United States had been > asked to appoint to review Persian manuscripts was also given the > responsibility of advising on the timeliness and wisdom of publishing > such texts. The House of Justice then presumed that the Salmani > memoirs were going through this process. In June 1982, however, one of > the friends wrote to the House of Justice expressing his great concern > at learning that the entire text of the Salmani memoirs was being > copied out with the intent of publishing them. On receipt of this > letter an enquiry was immediately made by telephone to Mr. > Darakhshani, the secretary of the recently appointed reviewing > committee for Persian publications, and he was asked to draw to your > attention the unwisdom of publishing the book in full at this time. > This was confirmed in a letter to Mr. Darakhshani on 30 June 1982. > > > > Your two cables of 1 and 15 July then arrived informing the House of > Justice that, not only had the book been passed by review of both the > Persian original and the English translation, but that it was actually > > > > /Cont'd.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kalimat Press > > 20 September 1982 > > Los Angeles, California > > Page two > > > > > > at the printers. Realizing the urgency of the matter and aware that, > apparently, the earlier committee appointed by the National Spiritual > Assembly had not appreciated the problems of timeliness presented by > this publication, the House of Justice instructed an ad hoc committee > to immediately identify those few passages which were objectionable > and to send them post‑haste to Mr. Darakhshani so that the > proofs could be corrected and the printing go forward. > > > > The House of Justice greatly regrets that it had to intervene at the > last minute in this way, and since it is clear that Kalimat Press had > faithfully followed all the requirements for review, the House of > Justice will pay the additional costs incurred as a result of the > last‑minute changes. > > > > In addition to the general question, Mr. Cole in his letter has > queried the reason for the excision of a number of passages. At the > moment the House of Justice has before it only the original Persian > manuscript, therefore it would appreciate your sending at your > earliest convenience a copy of the typescript or proofs of the book, > showing both the Persian and the English and whatever notes and > footnotes you have added, so that it can consider the passages in > detail and reply to the points that Mr. Cole has raised. > > > > > > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > > > Loraine Kerfoot > > > > For Department of the Secretariat > > > > > > cc: The National Spiritual of the United States , > > Mr. Juan Cole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE > > BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > > > Department of the Secretariat > > > > > 2 December 1982 > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Department of Medieval and > > Modern History > > Lucknow University > > Lucknow 226007 > > India > > > > Dear Baha'i Friend, > > > > > > The Universal House of Justice has now been able to compare the > published edition of the Salmani memoirs with the Persian manuscript: > and to consider the passages which the ad hoc committee had marked for > deletion. It is clear that Kalimat Press scrupulously followed all the > provisions for review of this book before publication, but, > unfortunately the process has been dogged by a series of' > misunderstandings and confusions. The House of Justice has instructed > us to send you the following comments on the points raised in your > letter of 13 August 1982. > > > > When the early correspondence took place between the World Centre and > Kalimat Press concerning this publication, the House of Justice was > relying on the discretion of the appropriate committee in the United > States to check not only the normal review aspects, but also the > timeliness and wisdom of such a publication. It did not itself check > the manuscript. If it had done so it now concludes that it would not > have given permission for its publication or translation at this time, > for reasons which will be explained below. > > > > In June 1982, concern was expressed to the Universal House of Justice > about the possible publication in full, in Persian, of these memoirs, > and action was taken in July, in great haste, to eliminate the most > harmful passages so that the publication of the book, which was > already at the press, could proceed. Unfortunately at that time the ad > hoc committee was unaware of the earlier correspondence and of the > fact that certain passages had already been quoted in translation in > books by Mr. Hasan Balyuzi and Mr. Adib Taherzadeh. > > > > Kalimat Press, in its turn, knowing of the prior publication of these > passages, and not understanding the reasons for the proposed > deletions, has, in fact, retained the larger part of the objectionable > passages. The publication is a fait accompli and the House of Justice > has therefore decided to permit it to stand, but not to) permit the > publication of the Persian text which, in fact, would be more damaging > than the English version. > > > > Cont'd/.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > Page 2 > > > > To the points of substance which you have raised concerning the > publication of historical texts, the House of Justice instructs us to > explain the following > > > > > > In order to preserve basic information and historical > materials for the use of future historians, the beloved Guardian > instructed the communities throughout Iran to record the history of > the Faith in their localities, and also gave instructions for the > memoirs of a number of early believers to be written down and > preserved. This was not a new advice and many friends, eyewitnesses of > certain events, in the lives of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l‑Baha, > had already committed their reminiscences to writing. The memoirs of > Ustad Muhammad‑`Aliy‑i‑Salmani are among, these and > were written down from his spoken recollections in his old age. There > is no question whatsoever of suppressing such records ‑ on the > contrary, the whole purpose of having them made was to preserve them, > and they have been made available to Baha'i historians, such as Mr. > Balyuzi and Mr. Taherzadeh for use in their work. When excerpts are > translated and published in such works, they are placed in context, > related to other records and, where necessary, annotated and commented > on. You will readily agree that such a use is not the same as > publication in full, even if supplementary footnotes are added, and > > does not carry the same implications. . > > > > In time entire collections of early documents of the Faith will be > published in scholarly editions for general use. An initial step in > suclbrl a process is Dr. Moojan Momen's admirable book "The Babi and > Baha’i Religions, 1.844‑1944 ‑ Some Contemporary > Western Accounts". Additional considerations, however, have to be > weighed in publishing texts by Baha'i writers. > > > > At the present time the general public, even if it has heard of the > Faith, is largely uninformed or misinformed. An increasing amount of > misinformation is continually being disseminated by opponents of the > Faith, both in the east and in the west. The principal task of the > Baha’is at the present time ‑ and especially of > Baha’i scholars ‑ is to present a true picture of the > Faith to the general public and to relate the Baha’i teachings > to the concerns and problems of mankind. When a Baha'i publishing > house issues a translation of a document such as Salmani's memoirs, > the implication to an average reader is that the Baha’is > consider this particular account worthy of publication, and, in the > absence of adequate footnotes or commentary to the contrary, the > reader will assume that Salmani's actions and statements are approved > by Baha’is and are accurate portrayals of the Faith. After all, > Salmani was a close companion of Baha’u’llah, comparable > in the eyes of a Christian reader with one of the early disciples of > Christ. > > > > Viewed in this light, certain of Salmani's accounts are misleading or > > > > Cont'd/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Page 3 > > > > unworthy and, apart from distorting the Faith for the average reader > can provide material for the enemies of the Faith who at the present > time are seizing every opportunity to attack the Cause and blacken its > reputation. > > > > To take a few examples from the passages queried by the ad hoc > committee: > > > > p. 17. There is a brief account of some believers from Sultanabad > saying to Baha'u'llah "You being God, Uncle, why do You give us such a > hard row to hoe?" It is an old accusation against the Baha’is, > especially from Muslims, that we regard Baha'u'llah as God. To print > such a story without an appropriate commentary gives fuel to our > Muslim enemies and makes the Faith look ridiculous to a western > reader. Unfortunately Kalimat Press, not realizing the reason for the > objection, let the objectionable part stand and deleted a > parenthetical comment "The Shi`is, however, were very hostile", which > is entirely innocuous. > > > p.30. There are some virtually incomprehensible comments about Mirza > Aqa Jan’s head, which are of no historical importance but are > unpleasant and unworthy. > > > 3. pp. 31‑34. There are three unpleasant stories > recounted by Salmani to illustrate Azal's gluttony. Shoghi Effendi was > always very careful in his accounts of Azal to confine his strictures > to his truly infamous conduct. He never stooped to making personal > criticisms of such a nature, which are unworthy , Publication of such > stories in the context of an annotated edition of a historical > document for scholarly study is one thing; publication in a book for > the general reader is quite another. Again, unfortunately, Kalimat > Press did not appreciate the reason for the committee's objection and > published the whole passage apart from a couple of brief deletions > which were of no significance. > > > > 3. p. 34. There is the account. of a disagreement between > Baha'u’llah and Azal over the shaving of Azal’s son's > head‑another unworthy story, the point of which is obscure. > > > > There are others of a similar character. > > > > The passages which have already been published in translation, such as > Azal's attempt to persuade Salmani to murder Baha'u'llah, provide > striking examples of the profound difference between publication in > the context of a properly balanced historical exposition, and > publication as unadorned parts of a narrative. > > > > In sum, to a knowledgeable Baha’i reader, Salmani’s > memoirs are a graphic illustration of the overwhelming problems with > which Baha'u'llah had to deal both from His enemies and because of the > actions of some of His own > > > > Cont'd/ .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole > > Page 4 > > > > > > faithful followers; but to an uninformed reader they give a misleading > and distorted picture of the Faith and of Baha'u'llah Himself. > > > > With loving Baha’i greetings, > > > > Loraine Kerfoot > > > > For Department of the Secretariat > > > > cc: The International Teaching Centre > > National Assembly of the United States > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Excerpts from contemporaneous responses to the UHJ letter to J. Cole > from other Baha’i intellectuals who saw it: > > > > 1) Firuz Kazemzadeh, member of the National Spiritual > Assembly of the U.S. and Yale historian, was extremely upset about the > tampering with a primary source and offered to write a letter of > support for Kalimat Press in the affair. > > > > 2) Professor Amin Banani of UCLA, who had written the > introduction to the Salmani memoir, insisted that his name be removed > from the introduction because he declined to be associated with a > censored document. > > > > 3) Another intellectual observed the following: > > > > It is simply untrue to suppose that the average > reader is incapable of distinguishing between the statements and > actions of an individual believer and the official positions of the > institutions of the Faith. This is an elementary distinction of the > kind which is made every day by persons in all walks of life. This > must be particularly true of a manuscript of personal memoirs which is > over seventy years old. Using the House's example of the early > disciples of Christ, many of their failings and misunderstandings are > clearly recorded in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. > Christians (or others) do not automatically assume that these > shortcomings are approved by modern Churches or are accurate > portrayals of Christian standards. What sane reader of the Gospels > would propose that since Peter denied Christ three times or because he > used his sword to sever the ear of a Roman soldier in the garden of > Gethsemane, these must be Christian teachings or approved examples of > Christian conduct? > > > > If anything, the current policies of review which the House is > applying will serve to blur what would otherwise be a perfectly > obvious distinction. Since the House now insists that any published > personal memoirs, or other statements of personal opinion on the Faith > by Baha'is, must actually reflect official policy and contain no > statements or reminiscences that run counter to present practice the > argument that any individual opinion constitutes official policy > (which would otherwise appear absurd) gains some force. Of course, it > is just the opposite impression. which the House wants to make. > > > > For instance, the only reason that anyone might > suppose that Salmani's particular account of Baha'u'llah's exiles > might be considered by Baha'is_to be of some special significance is > that it is the only one that has been allowed in print. If there were > several personal accounts of this kind available, from different > points of view, the notion that Salmani's memoir is somehow special > would be held by no one. . . > > > > The letter to Juan Cole states that Salmani's account was published > without footnotes or commentary. Both were provided in > [Kalimat’s] edition . . . > > > > The intention of the House to protect the reputation of the Faith is > certainly to be appreciated, but it seems clear that this reputation > is more likely to be blackened by present policies of strict > censorship than by anything in the Salmani memoirs—not only for > non‑Baha'is, but also for loyal believers who find such policies > difficult to understand Moreover, such policies play right into the > hands of critics of the Faith (such as Denis MacEoin in England) who > are hard at work to portray the Faith as an anti‑democratic, > totalitarian, rigidly authoritarian religion, which has falsified and > distorted its own history. > > > > To addresss the specific objections of the ad hoc committee: > > > > 2. It is clear that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be the > Godhead, and this can be conclusively demonstrated by reference to His > own Writings. On the other hand, it is also clear that there were many > Baha'is who believed that He was. (And there certainly still are!) > Numerous references in the published works of E. G. Browne indicate > this clearly. This could easily be proven, by any scholar who bothered > to try. So, the offending sentence in Salmani's memoirs adds nothing > to what is not already known. > > Furthermore, Baha'is know that in a certain sense we > believe that Baha'u'llah is God, as is explained in the Iqan. > > Especially since the incident is not without humor, was > intended as an amusing story, and involves an ignorant villager (and > in the context: of the introduction of the book), it seems unlikely > that it would fuel our enemies or make us seem ridiculous. > > > > 2. The comments which Salmani makes about Mirza Aqa Jan's head are > admittedly curious. However, I would query the statement that they are > of nc historical importance. If we could understand what the comments > meant they may be of great interest. Salmani was, after all, a > barber, and he may have recorded something about Mirza Aqa Jan's head > that others have failed to mention. > > > > 3 & 4. The truly extraordinary standard for forbidding the publication > of passages‑‑that they are "unpleasant" or "unworthy" > ‑‑appears to establish a new standard for the review of > materials which was not used by the Guardian, or previously used by > the House of Justice. Such a new standard raises many questions: > > Salmani can hardly have been expected to conform to standards of > style and choice of material found in the Guardian's writings, since > he was writing before the Guardian began his ministry. Beyond this, > there.mu8t be room in Baha'i literature for different kinds of books. > Not all can be similar to the works of Shoghi Effendi. In this case, > we were publishing the personal memories and pilgrim's notes of an > illiterate barber. It is certainly unfair to compare them to the > writings of the Guardian. > > The objection that a particular passage is "unpleasant" or if > unworthy" is extremely vague. It is difficult to see how a reviewing > committee could be expected to apply such a standard. It could provide > license to forbid the publication of almost anything. > > The other question, of course, is “impleasant" to whom? I > do not find anything in the memoirs unpleasant or unworthy of > publication. Neither did the translator, or the author of the > introduction to the book. Nor did two Separate reviewing committee of > the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, one Persian and > one American, find anything of this kind in the manuscript. > > > > Concerning Azal's plot to murder Baha'u'llah‑‑the > descriptions of which the ad‑hoc committee felt should not be > included in the translation of Salmani's memoirs, since these > descriptions had already been published in translation in two separate > books published by George Ronald, it would have been truly remarkable > to omit them from a translation of the memoirs as a whole. It was > impossible for me to understand how such a request could be justified. > > > > The letter of the House of Justice states that there is no question of > suppressing records such as Salmani's memoirs. The dictionary defines > the word suppress as: "2: to keep from public knowledge: as a: to > keep secret b: to stop or prohibit the publica­tion or revelation of." > There can be little argument that the House of Justice intends to > suppress certain parts of Salmani's memoirs. That it does not intend > to do so forever is encouraging, but it does not change the current > condition under which Baha'i publishers must operate. Nor will the > intention to release such information in the future protect us much > from the attacks of scholars or other critics who wish to criticize us > on this point. > > > > > > 4) Juan Cole wrote the UHJ on 9 January 1983 in New Delhi: > > > > I remain convinced that the policy outlined by the Universal House of > Justice is an unfortunate one and that time will prove it incorrect. > At that point, I am sure that the Supreme Institution will, on the > basis of further information and considerations, abandon its current > stance. > > > > I firmly believe that it is essentially dishonest to > delete passages from manuscripts when they are published, whether in > the original or in translation, and no matter how temporarily. I feel > that it is also morally wrong for a public institution to withhold > documents, particularly ones over thirty years old, from scrutiny by > the public. Because I believe that such acts are wrong in principle, > no particular justifications for them can strike me as wholly > convincing. I further fear that such a policy of secretiveness and > bowdlerization will inevitably besmirch the fair name of the Faith of > Baha'u'llah. > > > > I am convinced that the Baha'i Faith has nothing to fear from the > historical records that have survived the nineteenth century. It, is > too sublime, too true to ever be sullied by anything mere human beings > have written or done, We Baha’is should face the historical > record, not with fear, dissimulation and blue pencils, but with > unshakeable certitude of the purity of our Cause. > > > > > > > > > > Final note: The example given by the UHJ of historical accounts being > allowed to be published was Moojan Momen’s The Babi and > Baha’i Religions: Some Contemporary Western Accounts (Oxford: > George Ronald, 1980). In fact, this book was also censored and > important material in the British Archives that the editor had planned > to include was taken out at the UHJ’s insistence. > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > > Return to Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi, and Baha'i Movements > > Return to H-Bahai Digital Publications > > Return to H-Bahai Home Page > > Links to pages with similar resources ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:59 AM Subject: FYI - Baha'i Authorities Tamper with primary sources about Baha'u'llah - Kalimat Press, Juan Cole Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 (February 2002) https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol6/salmuhj.htm see also https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Censorship of Salmani's Memoirs by the Baha'i Authorities: Historical Documents from 1982 From materials in the private collections of Juan R. I. Cole ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 20 September 1982 Kalimat Press 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 270 Los Angeles, California 90024 U.S.A. Dear Baha’i Friends, On 31 August 1982 the Universal House of Justice received a letter from Mr. Juan Cole expressing concern aver a number of points connected with its decision that certain passages, of the Salmani memoirs should not be published at this time. Shortly afterwards it was informed that Mr. . . . was also writing on this subject, and it decided to await the arrival of his letter before replying. However, Mr. Roger White has now shared with the House of Justice extracts from a personal letter he has received from Mr. . . . , and it has instructed us to send you the following clarification and comments without further delay. As you will recall from the letter we wrote to you on behalf of the Universal House of Justice on 19 August 1980, the special committee that the National Spiritual Assembly of' the United States had been asked to appoint to review Persian manuscripts was also given the responsibility of advising on the timeliness and wisdom of publishing such texts. The House of Justice then presumed that the Salmani memoirs were going through this process. In June 1982, however, one of the friends wrote to the House of Justice expressing his great concern at learning that the entire text of the Salmani memoirs was being copied out with the intent of publishing them. On receipt of this letter an enquiry was immediately made by telephone to Mr. Darakhshani, the secretary of the recently appointed reviewing committee for Persian publications, and he was asked to draw to your attention the unwisdom of publishing the book in full at this time. This was confirmed in a letter to Mr. Darakhshani on 30 June 1982. Your two cables of 1 and 15 July then arrived informing the House of Justice that, not only had the book been passed by review of both the Persian original and the English translation, but that it was actually /Cont'd.... Kalimat Press 20 September 1982 Los Angeles, California Page two at the printers. Realizing the urgency of the matter and aware that, apparently, the earlier committee appointed by the National Spiritual Assembly had not appreciated the problems of timeliness presented by this publication, the House of Justice instructed an ad hoc committee to immediately identify those few passages which were objectionable and to send them post‑haste to Mr. Darakhshani so that the proofs could be corrected and the printing go forward. The House of Justice greatly regrets that it had to intervene at the last minute in this way, and since it is clear that Kalimat Press had faithfully followed all the requirements for review, the House of Justice will pay the additional costs incurred as a result of the last‑minute changes. In addition to the general question, Mr. Cole in his letter has queried the reason for the excision of a number of passages. At the moment the House of Justice has before it only the original Persian manuscript, therefore it would appreciate your sending at your earliest convenience a copy of the typescript or proofs of the book, showing both the Persian and the English and whatever notes and footnotes you have added, so that it can consider the passages in detail and reply to the points that Mr. Cole has raised. With loving Baha'i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The National Spiritual of the United States , Mr. Juan Cole THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 2 December 1982 Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Department of Medieval and Modern History Lucknow University Lucknow 226007 India Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has now been able to compare the published edition of the Salmani memoirs with the Persian manuscript: and to consider the passages which the ad hoc committee had marked for deletion. It is clear that Kalimat Press scrupulously followed all the provisions for review of this book before publication, but, unfortunately the process has been dogged by a series of' misunderstandings and confusions. The House of Justice has instructed us to send you the following comments on the points raised in your letter of 13 August 1982. When the early correspondence took place between the World Centre and Kalimat Press concerning this publication, the House of Justice was relying on the discretion of the appropriate committee in the United States to check not only the normal review aspects, but also the timeliness and wisdom of such a publication. It did not itself check the manuscript. If it had done so it now concludes that it would not have given permission for its publication or translation at this time, for reasons which will be explained below. In June 1982, concern was expressed to the Universal House of Justice about the possible publication in full, in Persian, of these memoirs, and action was taken in July, in great haste, to eliminate the most harmful passages so that the publication of the book, which was already at the press, could proceed. Unfortunately at that time the ad hoc committee was unaware of the earlier correspondence and of the fact that certain passages had already been quoted in translation in books by Mr. Hasan Balyuzi and Mr. Adib Taherzadeh. Kalimat Press, in its turn, knowing of the prior publication of these passages, and not understanding the reasons for the proposed deletions, has, in fact, retained the larger part of the objectionable passages. The publication is a fait accompli and the House of Justice has therefore decided to permit it to stand, but not to) permit the publication of the Persian text which, in fact, would be more damaging than the English version. Cont'd/.... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 2 To the points of substance which you have raised concerning the publication of historical texts, the House of Justice instructs us to explain the following In order to preserve basic information and historical materials for the use of future historians, the beloved Guardian instructed the communities throughout Iran to record the history of the Faith in their localities, and also gave instructions for the memoirs of a number of early believers to be written down and preserved. This was not a new advice and many friends, eyewitnesses of certain events, in the lives of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l‑Baha, had already committed their reminiscences to writing. The memoirs of Ustad Muhammad‑`Aliy‑i‑Salmani are among, these and were written down from his spoken recollections in his old age. There is no question whatsoever of suppressing such records ‑ on the contrary, the whole purpose of having them made was to preserve them, and they have been made available to Baha'i historians, such as Mr. Balyuzi and Mr. Taherzadeh for use in their work. When excerpts are translated and published in such works, they are placed in context, related to other records and, where necessary, annotated and commented on. You will readily agree that such a use is not the same as publication in full, even if supplementary footnotes are added, and does not carry the same implications. . In time entire collections of early documents of the Faith will be published in scholarly editions for general use. An initial step in suclbrl a process is Dr. Moojan Momen's admirable book "The Babi and Baha’i Religions, 1.844‑1944 ‑ Some Contemporary Western Accounts". Additional considerations, however, have to be weighed in publishing texts by Baha'i writers. At the present time the general public, even if it has heard of the Faith, is largely uninformed or misinformed. An increasing amount of misinformation is continually being disseminated by opponents of the Faith, both in the east and in the west. The principal task of the Baha’is at the present time ‑ and especially of Baha’i scholars ‑ is to present a true picture of the Faith to the general public and to relate the Baha’i teachings to the concerns and problems of mankind. When a Baha'i publishing house issues a translation of a document such as Salmani's memoirs, the implication to an average reader is that the Baha’is consider this particular account worthy of publication, and, in the absence of adequate footnotes or commentary to the contrary, the reader will assume that Salmani's actions and statements are approved by Baha’is and are accurate portrayals of the Faith. After all, Salmani was a close companion of Baha’u’llah, comparable in the eyes of a Christian reader with one of the early disciples of Christ. Viewed in this light, certain of Salmani's accounts are misleading or Cont'd/ Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 3 unworthy and, apart from distorting the Faith for the average reader can provide material for the enemies of the Faith who at the present time are seizing every opportunity to attack the Cause and blacken its reputation. To take a few examples from the passages queried by the ad hoc committee: p. 17. There is a brief account of some believers from Sultanabad saying to Baha'u'llah "You being God, Uncle, why do You give us such a hard row to hoe?" It is an old accusation against the Baha’is, especially from Muslims, that we regard Baha'u'llah as God. To print such a story without an appropriate commentary gives fuel to our Muslim enemies and makes the Faith look ridiculous to a western reader. Unfortunately Kalimat Press, not realizing the reason for the objection, let the objectionable part stand and deleted a parenthetical comment "The Shi`is, however, were very hostile", which is entirely innocuous. p.30. There are some virtually incomprehensible comments about Mirza Aqa Jan’s head, which are of no historical importance but are unpleasant and unworthy. 3. pp. 31‑34. There are three unpleasant stories recounted by Salmani to illustrate Azal's gluttony. Shoghi Effendi was always very careful in his accounts of Azal to confine his strictures to his truly infamous conduct. He never stooped to making personal criticisms of such a nature, which are unworthy , Publication of such stories in the context of an annotated edition of a historical document for scholarly study is one thing; publication in a book for the general reader is quite another. Again, unfortunately, Kalimat Press did not appreciate the reason for the committee's objection and published the whole passage apart from a couple of brief deletions which were of no significance. 3. p. 34. There is the account. of a disagreement between Baha'u’llah and Azal over the shaving of Azal’s son's head‑another unworthy story, the point of which is obscure. There are others of a similar character. The passages which have already been published in translation, such as Azal's attempt to persuade Salmani to murder Baha'u'llah, provide striking examples of the profound difference between publication in the context of a properly balanced historical exposition, and publication as unadorned parts of a narrative. In sum, to a knowledgeable Baha’i reader, Salmani’s memoirs are a graphic illustration of the overwhelming problems with which Baha'u'llah had to deal both from His enemies and because of the actions of some of His own Cont'd/ .... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 4 faithful followers; but to an uninformed reader they give a misleading and distorted picture of the Faith and of Baha'u'llah Himself. With loving Baha’i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The International Teaching Centre National Assembly of the United States Excerpts from contemporaneous responses to the UHJ letter to J. Cole from other Baha’i intellectuals who saw it: 1) Firuz Kazemzadeh, member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the U.S. and Yale historian, was extremely upset about the tampering with a primary source and offered to write a letter of support for Kalimat Press in the affair. 2) Professor Amin Banani of UCLA, who had written the introduction to the Salmani memoir, insisted that his name be removed from the introduction because he declined to be associated with a censored document. 3) Another intellectual observed the following: It is simply untrue to suppose that the average reader is incapable of distinguishing between the statements and actions of an individual believer and the official positions of the institutions of the Faith. This is an elementary distinction of the kind which is made every day by persons in all walks of life. This must be particularly true of a manuscript of personal memoirs which is over seventy years old. Using the House's example of the early disciples of Christ, many of their failings and misunderstandings are clearly recorded in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. Christians (or others) do not automatically assume that these shortcomings are approved by modern Churches or are accurate portrayals of Christian standards. What sane reader of the Gospels would propose that since Peter denied Christ three times or because he used his sword to sever the ear of a Roman soldier in the garden of Gethsemane, these must be Christian teachings or approved examples of Christian conduct? If anything, the current policies of review which the House is applying will serve to blur what would otherwise be a perfectly obvious distinction. Since the House now insists that any published personal memoirs, or other statements of personal opinion on the Faith by Baha'is, must actually reflect official policy and contain no statements or reminiscences that run counter to present practice the argument that any individual opinion constitutes official policy (which would otherwise appear absurd) gains some force. Of course, it is just the opposite impression. which the House wants to make. For instance, the only reason that anyone might suppose that Salmani's particular account of Baha'u'llah's exiles might be considered by Baha'is_to be of some special significance is that it is the only one that has been allowed in print. If there were several personal accounts of this kind available, from different points of view, the notion that Salmani's memoir is somehow special would be held by no one. . . The letter to Juan Cole states that Salmani's account was published without footnotes or commentary. Both were provided in [Kalimat’s] edition . . . The intention of the House to protect the reputation of the Faith is certainly to be appreciated, but it seems clear that this reputation is more likely to be blackened by present policies of strict censorship than by anything in the Salmani memoirs—not only for non‑Baha'is, but also for loyal believers who find such policies difficult to understand Moreover, such policies play right into the hands of critics of the Faith (such as Denis MacEoin in England) who are hard at work to portray the Faith as an anti‑democratic, totalitarian, rigidly authoritarian religion, which has falsified and distorted its own history. To addresss the specific objections of the ad hoc committee: 2. It is clear that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be the Godhead, and this can be conclusively demonstrated by reference to His own Writings. On the other hand, it is also clear that there were many Baha'is who believed that He was. (And there certainly still are!) Numerous references in the published works of E. G. Browne indicate this clearly. This could easily be proven, by any scholar who bothered to try. So, the offending sentence in Salmani's memoirs adds nothing to what is not already known. Furthermore, Baha'is know that in a certain sense we believe that Baha'u'llah is God, as is explained in the Iqan. Especially since the incident is not without humor, was intended as an amusing story, and involves an ignorant villager (and in the context: of the introduction of the book), it seems unlikely that it would fuel our enemies or make us seem ridiculous. 2. The comments which Salmani makes about Mirza Aqa Jan's head are admittedly curious. However, I would query the statement that they are of nc historical importance. If we could understand what the comments meant they may be of great interest. Salmani was, after all, a barber, and he may have recorded something about Mirza Aqa Jan's head that others have failed to mention. 3 & 4. The truly extraordinary standard for forbidding the publication of passages‑‑that they are "unpleasant" or "unworthy" ‑‑appears to establish a new standard for the review of materials which was not used by the Guardian, or previously used by the House of Justice. Such a new standard raises many questions: Salmani can hardly have been expected to conform to standards of style and choice of material found in the Guardian's writings, since he was writing before the Guardian began his ministry. Beyond this, there.mu8t be room in Baha'i literature for different kinds of books. Not all can be similar to the works of Shoghi Effendi. In this case, we were publishing the personal memories and pilgrim's notes of an illiterate barber. It is certainly unfair to compare them to the writings of the Guardian. The objection that a particular passage is "unpleasant" or if unworthy" is extremely vague. It is difficult to see how a reviewing committee could be expected to apply such a standard. It could provide license to forbid the publication of almost anything. The other question, of course, is “impleasant" to whom? I do not find anything in the memoirs unpleasant or unworthy of publication. Neither did the translator, or the author of the introduction to the book. Nor did two Separate reviewing committee of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, one Persian and one American, find anything of this kind in the manuscript. Concerning Azal's plot to murder Baha'u'llah‑‑the descriptions of which the ad‑hoc committee felt should not be included in the translation of Salmani's memoirs, since these descriptions had already been published in translation in two separate books published by George Ronald, it would have been truly remarkable to omit them from a translation of the memoirs as a whole. It was impossible for me to understand how such a request could be justified. The letter of the House of Justice states that there is no question of suppressing records such as Salmani's memoirs. The dictionary defines the word suppress as: "2: to keep from public knowledge: as a: to keep secret b: to stop or prohibit the publica­tion or revelation of." There can be little argument that the House of Justice intends to suppress certain parts of Salmani's memoirs. That it does not intend to do so forever is encouraging, but it does not change the current condition under which Baha'i publishers must operate. Nor will the intention to release such information in the future protect us much from the attacks of scholars or other critics who wish to criticize us on this point. 4) Juan Cole wrote the UHJ on 9 January 1983 in New Delhi: I remain convinced that the policy outlined by the Universal House of Justice is an unfortunate one and that time will prove it incorrect. At that point, I am sure that the Supreme Institution will, on the basis of further information and considerations, abandon its current stance. I firmly believe that it is essentially dishonest to delete passages from manuscripts when they are published, whether in the original or in translation, and no matter how temporarily. I feel that it is also morally wrong for a public institution to withhold documents, particularly ones over thirty years old, from scrutiny by the public. Because I believe that such acts are wrong in principle, no particular justifications for them can strike me as wholly convincing. I further fear that such a policy of secretiveness and bowdlerization will inevitably besmirch the fair name of the Faith of Baha'u'llah. I am convinced that the Baha'i Faith has nothing to fear from the historical records that have survived the nineteenth century. It, is too sublime, too true to ever be sullied by anything mere human beings have written or done, We Baha’is should face the historical record, not with fear, dissimulation and blue pencils, but with unshakeable certitude of the purity of our Cause. Final note: The example given by the UHJ of historical accounts being allowed to be published was Moojan Momen’s The Babi and Baha’i Religions: Some Contemporary Western Accounts (Oxford: George Ronald, 1980). In fact, this book was also censored and important material in the British Archives that the editor had planned to include was taken out at the UHJ’s insistence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi, and Baha'i Movements Return to H-Bahai Digital Publications Return to H-Bahai Home Page Links to pages with similar resources ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 7:51 AM Subject: To understand what lies behind fundamentalist facades here on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai, one might want to consider, To understand what lies behind fundamentalist facades here on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai, one might want to consider, as evidence, the following message: https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.google.com&output=gplain -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: PatrickHenry@liberty.com[SMTP:patrickhenry@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 9:42 AM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: Fw: AFers in Mark-10 Damage Control ----- Original Message ----- From: BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 9:41 AM Subject: Re: AFers in Mark-10 Damage Control "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a571se$cu2$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > Anyone notice the number of posts our resident fundalooniests and their spin > doctors are posting since the Aug 1999 letter was posted. The justifications > offered are great evidence, not to mention field research, that the *baha'i > technique* exists. Fred, I hope you're archiving all this stuff. I believe your speculations about damage control are quite right. The fundamentalists are clearly flooding talk.religion.bahai as an attempt to bury what they do not want non-bahais to know about. Yet so many other people have now remarked on "The Bahai Technique" that few outside observers of the bahai wars can doubt it any longer. I've thought for a very long time that most newcomers here soon realize the fundamentalists are completely dishonest. I'm sure the intelligence of newcomers can be trusted. "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm I've never bothered to directly archive the extremists among my fellow bahais. Dejanews and now www.google.com have done a very thorough job of that. It should be noted that www.google.com does not allow messages to be deleted so anything posted to Usenet has long been archived and preserved by them. Consider too that the gem below will always be there. To understand what lies behind fundamentalist facades here on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai, one might want to consider it, as evidence: https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.google.com&output=gplain I think the non-bahais of good judgement who happen along here can indeed be trusted to understand truth from falsehood. Overall, they won't be hoodwinked by our resident spin controllers, exactly what the spin controllers fear, and have now for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 10:48 AM Subject: bahai - Fundamentalist Damage Control & Flooding talk.religion.bahai "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a571se$cu2$1@gnamma.connect.com.au... > Anyone notice the number of posts our resident fundalooniests and their spin > doctors are posting since the Aug 1999 letter was posted. The justifications > offered are great evidence, not to mention field research, that the *baha'i > technique* exists. Fred, I hope you're archiving all this stuff. I believe your speculations about damage control are quite right. The fundamentalists are clearly flooding talk.religion.bahai as an attempt to bury what they do not want non-bahais to know about. Yet so many other people have now remarked on "The Bahai Technique" that few outside observers of the bahai wars can doubt it any longer. I've thought for a very long time that most newcomers here soon realize the fundamentalists are completely dishonest. I'm sure the intelligence of newcomers can be trusted. "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm I've never bothered to directly archive the extremists among my fellow bahais. Dejanews and now www.google.com have done a very thorough job of that. It should be noted that www.google.com does not allow messages to be deleted so anything posted to Usenet has long been archived and preserved by them. Consider too that the gem below will always be there. To understand what lies behind fundamentalist facades here on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai, one might want to consider it, as evidence: https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.g oogle.com&output=gplain I think the non-bahais of good judgement who happen along here can indeed be trusted to understand truth from falsehood. Overall, they won't be hoodwinked by our resident spin controllers, exactly what the spin controllers fear, and have now for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 10:52 AM Subject: FYI - FULL TEXT HERE - Baha'i Authorities Tamper with primary sources about Baha'u'llah - READ ALL ABOUT IT!!!!! Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 (February 2002) https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol6/salmuhj.htm see also https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Censorship of Salmani's Memoirs by the Baha'i Authorities: Historical Documents from 1982 From materials in the private collections of Juan R. I. Cole ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 20 September 1982 Kalimat Press 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 270 Los Angeles, California 90024 U.S.A. Dear Baha’i Friends, On 31 August 1982 the Universal House of Justice received a letter from Mr. Juan Cole expressing concern aver a number of points connected with its decision that certain passages, of the Salmani memoirs should not be published at this time. Shortly afterwards it was informed that Mr. . . . was also writing on this subject, and it decided to await the arrival of his letter before replying. However, Mr. Roger White has now shared with the House of Justice extracts from a personal letter he has received from Mr. . . . , and it has instructed us to send you the following clarification and comments without further delay. As you will recall from the letter we wrote to you on behalf of the Universal House of Justice on 19 August 1980, the special committee that the National Spiritual Assembly of' the United States had been asked to appoint to review Persian manuscripts was also given the responsibility of advising on the timeliness and wisdom of publishing such texts. The House of Justice then presumed that the Salmani memoirs were going through this process. In June 1982, however, one of the friends wrote to the House of Justice expressing his great concern at learning that the entire text of the Salmani memoirs was being copied out with the intent of publishing them. On receipt of this letter an enquiry was immediately made by telephone to Mr. Darakhshani, the secretary of the recently appointed reviewing committee for Persian publications, and he was asked to draw to your attention the unwisdom of publishing the book in full at this time. This was confirmed in a letter to Mr. Darakhshani on 30 June 1982. Your two cables of 1 and 15 July then arrived informing the House of Justice that, not only had the book been passed by review of both the Persian original and the English translation, but that it was actually /Cont'd.... Kalimat Press 20 September 1982 Los Angeles, California Page two at the printers. Realizing the urgency of the matter and aware that, apparently, the earlier committee appointed by the National Spiritual Assembly had not appreciated the problems of timeliness presented by this publication, the House of Justice instructed an ad hoc committee to immediately identify those few passages which were objectionable and to send them post‑haste to Mr. Darakhshani so that the proofs could be corrected and the printing go forward. The House of Justice greatly regrets that it had to intervene at the last minute in this way, and since it is clear that Kalimat Press had faithfully followed all the requirements for review, the House of Justice will pay the additional costs incurred as a result of the last‑minute changes. In addition to the general question, Mr. Cole in his letter has queried the reason for the excision of a number of passages. At the moment the House of Justice has before it only the original Persian manuscript, therefore it would appreciate your sending at your earliest convenience a copy of the typescript or proofs of the book, showing both the Persian and the English and whatever notes and footnotes you have added, so that it can consider the passages in detail and reply to the points that Mr. Cole has raised. With loving Baha'i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The National Spiritual of the United States , Mr. Juan Cole THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 2 December 1982 Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Department of Medieval and Modern History Lucknow University Lucknow 226007 India Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has now been able to compare the published edition of the Salmani memoirs with the Persian manuscript: and to consider the passages which the ad hoc committee had marked for deletion. It is clear that Kalimat Press scrupulously followed all the provisions for review of this book before publication, but, unfortunately the process has been dogged by a series of' misunderstandings and confusions. The House of Justice has instructed us to send you the following comments on the points raised in your letter of 13 August 1982. When the early correspondence took place between the World Centre and Kalimat Press concerning this publication, the House of Justice was relying on the discretion of the appropriate committee in the United States to check not only the normal review aspects, but also the timeliness and wisdom of such a publication. It did not itself check the manuscript. If it had done so it now concludes that it would not have given permission for its publication or translation at this time, for reasons which will be explained below. In June 1982, concern was expressed to the Universal House of Justice about the possible publication in full, in Persian, of these memoirs, and action was taken in July, in great haste, to eliminate the most harmful passages so that the publication of the book, which was already at the press, could proceed. Unfortunately at that time the ad hoc committee was unaware of the earlier correspondence and of the fact that certain passages had already been quoted in translation in books by Mr. Hasan Balyuzi and Mr. Adib Taherzadeh. Kalimat Press, in its turn, knowing of the prior publication of these passages, and not understanding the reasons for the proposed deletions, has, in fact, retained the larger part of the objectionable passages. The publication is a fait accompli and the House of Justice has therefore decided to permit it to stand, but not to) permit the publication of the Persian text which, in fact, would be more damaging than the English version. Cont'd/.... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 2 To the points of substance which you have raised concerning the publication of historical texts, the House of Justice instructs us to explain the following In order to preserve basic information and historical materials for the use of future historians, the beloved Guardian instructed the communities throughout Iran to record the history of the Faith in their localities, and also gave instructions for the memoirs of a number of early believers to be written down and preserved. This was not a new advice and many friends, eyewitnesses of certain events, in the lives of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l‑Baha, had already committed their reminiscences to writing. The memoirs of Ustad Muhammad‑`Aliy‑i‑Salmani are among, these and were written down from his spoken recollections in his old age. There is no question whatsoever of suppressing such records ‑ on the contrary, the whole purpose of having them made was to preserve them, and they have been made available to Baha'i historians, such as Mr. Balyuzi and Mr. Taherzadeh for use in their work. When excerpts are translated and published in such works, they are placed in context, related to other records and, where necessary, annotated and commented on. You will readily agree that such a use is not the same as publication in full, even if supplementary footnotes are added, and does not carry the same implications. . In time entire collections of early documents of the Faith will be published in scholarly editions for general use. An initial step in suclbrl a process is Dr. Moojan Momen's admirable book "The Babi and Baha’i Religions, 1.844‑1944 ‑ Some Contemporary Western Accounts". Additional considerations, however, have to be weighed in publishing texts by Baha'i writers. At the present time the general public, even if it has heard of the Faith, is largely uninformed or misinformed. An increasing amount of misinformation is continually being disseminated by opponents of the Faith, both in the east and in the west. The principal task of the Baha’is at the present time ‑ and especially of Baha’i scholars ‑ is to present a true picture of the Faith to the general public and to relate the Baha’i teachings to the concerns and problems of mankind. When a Baha'i publishing house issues a translation of a document such as Salmani's memoirs, the implication to an average reader is that the Baha’is consider this particular account worthy of publication, and, in the absence of adequate footnotes or commentary to the contrary, the reader will assume that Salmani's actions and statements are approved by Baha’is and are accurate portrayals of the Faith. After all, Salmani was a close companion of Baha’u’llah, comparable in the eyes of a Christian reader with one of the early disciples of Christ. Viewed in this light, certain of Salmani's accounts are misleading or Cont'd/ Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 3 unworthy and, apart from distorting the Faith for the average reader can provide material for the enemies of the Faith who at the present time are seizing every opportunity to attack the Cause and blacken its reputation. To take a few examples from the passages queried by the ad hoc committee: p. 17. There is a brief account of some believers from Sultanabad saying to Baha'u'llah "You being God, Uncle, why do You give us such a hard row to hoe?" It is an old accusation against the Baha’is, especially from Muslims, that we regard Baha'u'llah as God. To print such a story without an appropriate commentary gives fuel to our Muslim enemies and makes the Faith look ridiculous to a western reader. Unfortunately Kalimat Press, not realizing the reason for the objection, let the objectionable part stand and deleted a parenthetical comment "The Shi`is, however, were very hostile", which is entirely innocuous. p.30. There are some virtually incomprehensible comments about Mirza Aqa Jan’s head, which are of no historical importance but are unpleasant and unworthy. 3. pp. 31‑34. There are three unpleasant stories recounted by Salmani to illustrate Azal's gluttony. Shoghi Effendi was always very careful in his accounts of Azal to confine his strictures to his truly infamous conduct. He never stooped to making personal criticisms of such a nature, which are unworthy , Publication of such stories in the context of an annotated edition of a historical document for scholarly study is one thing; publication in a book for the general reader is quite another. Again, unfortunately, Kalimat Press did not appreciate the reason for the committee's objection and published the whole passage apart from a couple of brief deletions which were of no significance. 3. p. 34. There is the account. of a disagreement between Baha'u’llah and Azal over the shaving of Azal’s son's head‑another unworthy story, the point of which is obscure. There are others of a similar character. The passages which have already been published in translation, such as Azal's attempt to persuade Salmani to murder Baha'u'llah, provide striking examples of the profound difference between publication in the context of a properly balanced historical exposition, and publication as unadorned parts of a narrative. In sum, to a knowledgeable Baha’i reader, Salmani’s memoirs are a graphic illustration of the overwhelming problems with which Baha'u'llah had to deal both from His enemies and because of the actions of some of His own Cont'd/ .... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 4 faithful followers; but to an uninformed reader they give a misleading and distorted picture of the Faith and of Baha'u'llah Himself. With loving Baha’i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The International Teaching Centre National Assembly of the United States Excerpts from contemporaneous responses to the UHJ letter to J. Cole from other Baha’i intellectuals who saw it: 1) Firuz Kazemzadeh, member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the U.S. and Yale historian, was extremely upset about the tampering with a primary source and offered to write a letter of support for Kalimat Press in the affair. 2) Professor Amin Banani of UCLA, who had written the introduction to the Salmani memoir, insisted that his name be removed from the introduction because he declined to be associated with a censored document. 3) Another intellectual observed the following: It is simply untrue to suppose that the average reader is incapable of distinguishing between the statements and actions of an individual believer and the official positions of the institutions of the Faith. This is an elementary distinction of the kind which is made every day by persons in all walks of life. This must be particularly true of a manuscript of personal memoirs which is over seventy years old. Using the House's example of the early disciples of Christ, many of their failings and misunderstandings are clearly recorded in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. Christians (or others) do not automatically assume that these shortcomings are approved by modern Churches or are accurate portrayals of Christian standards. What sane reader of the Gospels would propose that since Peter denied Christ three times or because he used his sword to sever the ear of a Roman soldier in the garden of Gethsemane, these must be Christian teachings or approved examples of Christian conduct? If anything, the current policies of review which the House is applying will serve to blur what would otherwise be a perfectly obvious distinction. Since the House now insists that any published personal memoirs, or other statements of personal opinion on the Faith by Baha'is, must actually reflect official policy and contain no statements or reminiscences that run counter to present practice the argument that any individual opinion constitutes official policy (which would otherwise appear absurd) gains some force. Of course, it is just the opposite impression. which the House wants to make. For instance, the only reason that anyone might suppose that Salmani's particular account of Baha'u'llah's exiles might be considered by Baha'is_to be of some special significance is that it is the only one that has been allowed in print. If there were several personal accounts of this kind available, from different points of view, the notion that Salmani's memoir is somehow special would be held by no one. . . The letter to Juan Cole states that Salmani's account was published without footnotes or commentary. Both were provided in [Kalimat’s] edition . . . The intention of the House to protect the reputation of the Faith is certainly to be appreciated, but it seems clear that this reputation is more likely to be blackened by present policies of strict censorship than by anything in the Salmani memoirs—not only for non‑Baha'is, but also for loyal believers who find such policies difficult to understand Moreover, such policies play right into the hands of critics of the Faith (such as Denis MacEoin in England) who are hard at work to portray the Faith as an anti‑democratic, totalitarian, rigidly authoritarian religion, which has falsified and distorted its own history. To addresss the specific objections of the ad hoc committee: 2. It is clear that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be the Godhead, and this can be conclusively demonstrated by reference to His own Writings. On the other hand, it is also clear that there were many Baha'is who believed that He was. (And there certainly still are!) Numerous references in the published works of E. G. Browne indicate this clearly. This could easily be proven, by any scholar who bothered to try. So, the offending sentence in Salmani's memoirs adds nothing to what is not already known. Furthermore, Baha'is know that in a certain sense we believe that Baha'u'llah is God, as is explained in the Iqan. Especially since the incident is not without humor, was intended as an amusing story, and involves an ignorant villager (and in the context: of the introduction of the book), it seems unlikely that it would fuel our enemies or make us seem ridiculous. 2. The comments which Salmani makes about Mirza Aqa Jan's head are admittedly curious. However, I would query the statement that they are of nc historical importance. If we could understand what the comments meant they may be of great interest. Salmani was, after all, a barber, and he may have recorded something about Mirza Aqa Jan's head that others have failed to mention. 3 & 4. The truly extraordinary standard for forbidding the publication of passages‑‑that they are "unpleasant" or "unworthy" ‑‑appears to establish a new standard for the review of materials which was not used by the Guardian, or previously used by the House of Justice. Such a new standard raises many questions: Salmani can hardly have been expected to conform to standards of style and choice of material found in the Guardian's writings, since he was writing before the Guardian began his ministry. Beyond this, there.mu8t be room in Baha'i literature for different kinds of books. Not all can be similar to the works of Shoghi Effendi. In this case, we were publishing the personal memories and pilgrim's notes of an illiterate barber. It is certainly unfair to compare them to the writings of the Guardian. The objection that a particular passage is "unpleasant" or if unworthy" is extremely vague. It is difficult to see how a reviewing committee could be expected to apply such a standard. It could provide license to forbid the publication of almost anything. The other question, of course, is “impleasant" to whom? I do not find anything in the memoirs unpleasant or unworthy of publication. Neither did the translator, or the author of the introduction to the book. Nor did two Separate reviewing committee of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, one Persian and one American, find anything of this kind in the manuscript. Concerning Azal's plot to murder Baha'u'llah‑‑the descriptions of which the ad‑hoc committee felt should not be included in the translation of Salmani's memoirs, since these descriptions had already been published in translation in two separate books published by George Ronald, it would have been truly remarkable to omit them from a translation of the memoirs as a whole. It was impossible for me to understand how such a request could be justified. The letter of the House of Justice states that there is no question of suppressing records such as Salmani's memoirs. The dictionary defines the word suppress as: "2: to keep from public knowledge: as a: to keep secret b: to stop or prohibit the publica­tion or revelation of." There can be little argument that the House of Justice intends to suppress certain parts of Salmani's memoirs. That it does not intend to do so forever is encouraging, but it does not change the current condition under which Baha'i publishers must operate. Nor will the intention to release such information in the future protect us much from the attacks of scholars or other critics who wish to criticize us on this point. 4) Juan Cole wrote the UHJ on 9 January 1983 in New Delhi: I remain convinced that the policy outlined by the Universal House of Justice is an unfortunate one and that time will prove it incorrect. At that point, I am sure that the Supreme Institution will, on the basis of further information and considerations, abandon its current stance. I firmly believe that it is essentially dishonest to delete passages from manuscripts when they are published, whether in the original or in translation, and no matter how temporarily. I feel that it is also morally wrong for a public institution to withhold documents, particularly ones over thirty years old, from scrutiny by the public. Because I believe that such acts are wrong in principle, no particular justifications for them can strike me as wholly convincing. I further fear that such a policy of secretiveness and bowdlerization will inevitably besmirch the fair name of the Faith of Baha'u'llah. I am convinced that the Baha'i Faith has nothing to fear from the historical records that have survived the nineteenth century. It, is too sublime, too true to ever be sullied by anything mere human beings have written or done, We Baha’is should face the historical record, not with fear, dissimulation and blue pencils, but with unshakeable certitude of the purity of our Cause. Final note: The example given by the UHJ of historical accounts being allowed to be published was Moojan Momen’s The Babi and Baha’i Religions: Some Contemporary Western Accounts (Oxford: George Ronald, 1980). In fact, this book was also censored and important material in the British Archives that the editor had planned to include was taken out at the UHJ’s insistence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi, and Baha'i Movements Return to H-Bahai Digital Publications Return to H-Bahai Home Page Links to pages with similar resources ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 10:53 AM Subject: bahai - FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S Fortress of Well-Being - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S Fortress of Well-Being - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm For the uninformed, it should be noted, beforehand, that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais, that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience and some family members to cease associating with siblings, children, and parents. The full text below also available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----------------- August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 7:06 AM Subject: Excellent definition of "love bombing." From: "Dermod Ryder" This is what is known as the "love bomb" technique. Disregard and entirely ignore the substance of any complaint or criticism and throw out this carpet of "bahai love" which will overwhelm the reason and appeal to the emotion. I've been vaccinated! What I also glean from recourse to this technique is that there is no answer to the points I raised. In effect you guys who support the AO do so through thick and thin to the point where you cannot and will not admit that it has any faults of any substantive value. Because guys like me cannot agree with you - the fault is obviously ours. -- Excellent definition of "love bombing." -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 8:36 AM To: wpeal@oe.homecomm.net Subject: Letters to the Editor - March 1, 2002 - A Response to Baha'i Ad Letters to the Editor Wayne Peal Clarion-Eccentric 400 Water St., #203 Rochester, MI 48307 wpeal@oe.homecomm.net In response to the paid half-page ad by my fellow Baha'is in your February 28 issue, which offers a website link "for more information," I believe Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's Department of History, has a webpage of extensive and disturbing documentation that anyone interested in the Baha'i Faith should be aware of: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm In his book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." For numerous other views in balance to the paid ad O&E ran, I also recommend the over 50 megabytes of documentation on my own website, The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills 668 Bolinger Rochester Hills, MI 48307 248-608-6424 FG@comcast.net Appeared in O & E ½ page ad on February 28, 2002: ---- The Destiny of America and the Promise of World Peace A Statement from the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'í of the United States At this time of world turmoil, the United States Bahá'í community offers a perspective on the destiny of America as the promoter of world peace. More than a hundred years ago, Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Bahá'í Faith, addressing heads of state, proclaimed that the age of maturity for the entire human race had come. The unity of humankind was now to be established as the foundation of the great peace that would mark the highest stage in humanity's spiritual and social evolution. Revolutionary and world-shaking changes were therefore inevitable. The Bahá'í writings state: The world is moving on. Its events are unfolding ominously and with bewildering rapidity. The whirlwind of its passions is swift and alarmingly violent. The New World is insensibly drawn into its vortex. . . . Dangers, undreamt of and unpredictable, threaten it both from within and from without. Its governments and peoples are being gradually enmeshed in the coils of the world's recurrent crises and fierce controversies. . . . The world is contracting into a neighborhood. America, willingly or unwillingly, must face and grapple with this new situation. For purposes of national security, let alone any humanitarian motive, she must assume the obligations imposed by this newly created neighborhood. Paradoxical as it may seem, her only hope of extricating herself from the perils gathering around her is to become entangled in that very web of international association which the Hand of an inscrutable Providence is weaving. The American nation, Bahá'ís believe, will evolve through tests and trials to become a land of spiritual distinction and leadership, a champion of justice and unity among all peoples and nations, and a powerful servant of the cause of everlasting peace. This is the peace promised by God in the sacred texts of the world's religions. Establishing peace is not simply a matter of signing treaties and protocols; it is a complex task requiring a new level of commitment to resolving issues not customarily associated with the pursuit of peace. Universal acceptance of the spiritual principle of the oneness of humankind is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. Racism, one of the most baneful and persistent evils, is a major barrier to peace. The emancipation of women, the achievement of full equality of the sexes, is one of the most important, though less acknowledged, prerequisites of peace. The inordinate disparity between rich and poor keeps the world in a state of instability, preventing the achievement of peace. Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity as a whole. Religious strife, the cause of innumerable wars and conflicts throughout history, is a major obstacle to progress. The challenge facing the world's religious leaders is to contemplate, with hearts filled with compassion and the desire for truth, the plight of humanity, and to ask themselves whether they cannot, in humility before their God, submerge their theological differences in a great spirit of mutual forbearance that will enable them to work together for the advancement of human understanding and peace. Bahá'ís pray, "May this American Democracy be the first nation to establish the foundation of international agreement. May it be the first nation to proclaim the unity of mankind. May it be the first to unfurl the standard of the Most Great Peace." During this hour of crisis, we affirm our abiding faith in the destiny of America. We know that the road to its destiny is long, thorny and tortuous, but we are confident that America will emerge from her trials undivided and undefeatable. —National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States For more information and for a free copy of the booklet "The Promise of World Peace" please visit our web site at Www.us.bahai.org or call us toll free at 1-800-22-UNITE Local Phone 248-737-4006 -- https://www.us.bahai.org/world_peace/amers_destiny.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:47 PM Subject: Re: Note to newcomers to Unmoderated Bahai Newsgroups Michael, It's been over thirty years since I read Plutarch. How good of you to remind us of him. "No wild beast is more savage than man when his passions are armed with power." My kind of writer.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Michael McKenny" wrote in message news:a5om1i$coo$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... > Greetings, Dermod, Paul and anyone interested in the Roman Way. > Actually, Marcus Tullius Cicero did not commit suicide, other than > by exercising freedom of speech and opposing Mark Anthony's less than > perfect exercise of power. Oh, and there was that little wordplay -- > one of those rijal like words that can get one into trouble. You know: > "The boy is to be praised, honoured and extolled." Ha!Ha! Extolled, get > it ("shoved aside"). But you know Plutarch says that Caesar ("The boy", > Augustus) held out for two days and only on the third day did he give > in to Mark Anthony's demand that Cicero's name be included: > "A list was drawn up of the names of more than 200 men who were to > be put to death. But what caused most trouble at their discussions was the > question of including Cicero's name in this list. Antony refused to come > to terms unless Cicero was marked down first for death; Lepidus sided with > Antony, and Caesar held out against them both. They met secretly by > themselves by the city of Bononia, and these meetings lasted for three > days. They came together at a place surrounded by a river and at some > distance from their camps. It is said that for the first two days Caesar > kept up the struggle to save Cicero, but gave in on the third day and > abandoned him. The terms of their mutual concessions were as follows: > Caesar was to desert Cicero, Lepidus, his brother Paulus, and Antony, > Lucius Caesar, who was his uncle on his mother's side. So all > considerations of humanity were swept aside by their rage and fury; or was > this, rather, a demonstration that no wild beast is more savage than man > when his passions are armed with power." Plutarch, life of Cicero, in > FALL OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC, Penguin, transl. Rex Warner, p. 317 > The story continues with the account of Cicero trying to escape the > assassins, but his path is indicated to them, they come upon him, he orders > his litter set down, he sticks his head out and his throat is cut. > "He was in his sixty-fourth year. By Antony's orders Herennius cut off > his head and his hands -- the hands with which he had written the > Philippics."... > "A long time afterwards, so I have been told, Caesar was visiting the > son of one of his daughters. The boy had a book of Cicero's in his hands > and, terrified of his grandfather, tried to hide it under his cloak. > Caesar noticed this and, after taking the book from him, stood there and > read a great part of it. He then handed it back to the young man with the > words: 'A learned man, my child, a learned man and a lover of his country.'" > To M. Tullius Cicero, Michael. > > "Dermod Ryder" (Grim_Reaper_Mk2@btinternet.com) writes: > > "Pat Kohli" wrote in message > > news:3C7D8645.C7F176E1@ameritel.net... > >> > >> > >> Paul Hammond wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > I thought that an Emperor (Augustus?) made him "take the roman > >> > way" after a lifetime of opposing the death of the republic. > >> > > >> > >> I thought the Roman Way was bulemia, or something like it. > > > > The Roman way was to open your wrists with a knife whilst in a hot > > bath! The Emperors often offered it to their enemies - it saved the > > expense of a trial especially when there wasn't much in the way of > > evidence. The inducement was that one's property remained with the > > family and was not forfeit to the State. > > > > Could the A Onions make this popular - maybe declining to confer the > > CB tag and consequent damnation if one did the decent thing .... ? ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 11:37 AM Subject: Re: General question about Fred G. and the like... Larry, Thank you for having the courage to speak your mind. Could you please provide a book and page reference for the quotation? I'd appreciate it. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Larry Rowe" wrote in message news:3c80b978_1@dns.sd54.bc.ca... > Hello all , > > The Universal House of Justice is wrong when it breaches the following > keynote of the Cause of God in its interactions with believers . > > "Lets us bear in mind that the keynote of the Cause of God is not > dictatorial authority but humble fellowship , not arbitrary power , but the > spirit of frank and loving consultation ."~Shoghi Effendi~ > > That the Universal House of Justice has breached this keynote of the Cause > of God is clear to all who have looked into their treatment of Alison > Marshall concerning her removal from Bahai' membership . > > They have behaved in a very unBaha'i like manner and instead of "humble > fellowship" they used "dictatorial authority" instead of "frank and loving > consultation" they used arbitrary power . > > Infallibilty means never having to say your sorry . > > The thesis of the infallibilty of the Universal House of Justice needs to > be examined . > > Yours Larry Rowe > > ---------- From: Larry Rowe[SMTP:substance@kootenay.com] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 12:31 AM To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com Subject: quote Dear Fred , The quote I used is from Baha'i Administration p.63 . I got it off of Ocean . All the best ! Yours Larry Rowe ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 9:20 AM Subject: Re: Cultic Studies Journal article Congratulations! I look forward to reading it. Please provide us with a link directly to CSJ if or when your article appears on their site. Not much to disagree with in the enticing abstract! "Abstract: The Baha'i Faith, best-known for its liberal social teachings and tolerance towards other religions, has an authoritarian governing structure that has caused a high level of disillusionment among adherents. Because of the religion's stress on unity, there is considerable insecurity about the expression of dissent and a fear of internal enemies. Conformity is enforced by sanctions, excommunication, and shunning, and information is controlled through a system of censorship. Although the religion is governed by elected institutions, they are not held accountable to the electorate. Moreover, the supreme governing institution is believed to be infallible. While the spread of the Internet in the 1990s has weakened the administration's control of information, the Baha'i leadership has threatened and sanctioned liberal intellectuals for the expression of their opinions on email forums." https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u8375mr9o6ab99@corp.supernews.com... > My article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" > is now in print and available on my website: > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > Cultic Studies Journal has said that comments, both positive and negative > are welcome. > > Karen Bacquet > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 7:32 AM Subject: ATTN - Nima - Maneck's slander of you on AOL Subject: Re: Censorship means * to distrust * Date: 3/3/2002 12:03 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Smaneck Message-id: <20020303000305.20949.00002450@mb-cg.aol.com> > > Nima? Is that a fanatic of some kind? If you don't know him, never mind. He is one of the dissidents who withdrew from the Faith. warmest, Susan https://www.susanmaneck.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 7:58 AM Subject: Re: Cultic Studies Journal article Karen, Re: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html I understand it can take many journals a very long time to get a piece published and distributed. I remember a horrifying five-year wait I had on one essay. Does something to soul, though, not all bad. Anyway, I've printed off your article this morning and look forward to reading it. Do give us a heads-up on its online appearance. Incidentally, I think you've achieved a major victory for the defense of the principles Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha extolled by publishing such an informative article in a publication of the American Family Foundation. For those unfamiliar with AFF, see https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm I have for years tried unsuccessfully to help them understand how things actually stand within everyday bahai circles. Respectfully, Fred The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u84fajrqf4m688@corp.supernews.com... > > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:a5tbms$a3csd$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Congratulations! I look forward to reading it. Please > > provide us with a link directly to CSJ if or when your > > article appears on their site. > > Dear Fred, > > I was told that the article will eventually appear in AFF's online journal > *Cults and Society*, but I expect that will take a while. After all, this > issue of CSJ that just came out is the 2001 volume, so it looks like things > move pretty slowly. It was actually the online journal that I originally > queried about, then the editor invited me to write for the print journal. > Anyway, I'll let you know when the article appears on their site. > > Love, Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > > > > Not much to disagree with in the enticing abstract! > > > > "Abstract: The Baha'i Faith, best-known for its liberal social teachings > and > > tolerance towards other religions, has an authoritarian governing > structure > > that has caused a high level of disillusionment among adherents. Because > of > > the religion's stress on unity, there is considerable insecurity about the > > expression of dissent and a fear of internal enemies. Conformity is > enforced > > by sanctions, excommunication, and shunning, and information is controlled > > through a system of censorship. Although the religion is governed by > elected > > institutions, they are not held accountable to the electorate. Moreover, > the > > supreme governing institution is believed to be infallible. While the > spread > > of the Internet in the 1990s has weakened the administration's control of > > information, the Baha'i leadership has threatened and sanctioned liberal > > intellectuals for the expression of their opinions on email forums." > > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message > > news:u8375mr9o6ab99@corp.supernews.com... > > > My article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i > Community" > > > is now in print and available on my website: > > > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > > > > > Cultic Studies Journal has said that comments, both positive and > negative > > > are welcome. > > > > > > Karen Bacquet > > > > > > -- > > > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > > > Baha'u'llah > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 8:10 AM Subject: Re: Two more Baha'is Martyred in Central Asia - MSG from the Baha'i World Center I'm saddened to hear of anyone's death, including fellow bahais. How is the fanaticism of the uhj any different from the extremisim of the murderers? I and many others believe the same intolerant fundamentalism, essentially, now pervades the so-called administrative order.... July 24, 1998: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm The same litany of lies and attempts to monopolize on the murder of these recent victims of fanaticism will certainly be soon pouring out of the portals of bahai fundamentalism.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Pat Kohli" wrote in message news:3C840A84.132AB56A@ameritel.net... > Allahu Abha! > > Thanks for bringing this to ARB. I'm crossposting TRB in. > > > Blessings! > - Pat > kohli@ameritel.net > > NightShadow wrote: > > > Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 2:39 PM > > Subject: Martyrs > > > > B A H A ' I W O R L D C E N T R E > > > > 27 February 2002 > > > > To National Spiritual Assemblies > > > > Dear Baha'i Friends, > > > > With exceeding sorrow, the Universal House of Justice has asked > > us to announce the martyrdom by assassination of Rashid Gulov and > > Mosadegh Afshin Shokoufeh, two devoted believers in Tajikistan. > > They were killed at the hands of fanatical elements in that > > country who wished to cause harm to followers of Baha'u'llah. > > > > On the evening of 23 October last year, Rashid Gulov, a member of > > the Local Spiritual Assembly of Dushanbe, was shot and killed > > while returning from work. > > > > On the morning of 3 December, Mosadegh Afshin Shokoufeh was shot > > outside his home and died on the way to the hospital. He was a > > member of the Local Spiritual Assembly of Dushanbe and had > > previously served on the National Spiritual Assembly of > > Tajikistan. > > > > The investigation by the Tajik authorities into the murders has > > shown that the two Baha'is were killed because of their Faith. > > You will recall the assassination only two years ago of Abdullah > > Mogharrabi in that same country. > > > > Both of these friends were, with their wives and families, > > actively involved in raising the banner of Baha'u'llah in > > Tajikistan and rendering services to the Cause. A community so > > distinguished by the sacrifices of martyrs is bound to attract > > bountiful confirmations of its efforts from on high. May its > > members thus be impelled to deepen their loving unity and to > > reach out even further to their compatriots with the only Message > > that can bring them true prosperity and peace. > > > > The House of Justice supplicates at the Sacred Threshold for the > > progress of the souls of Rashid Gulov and Mosadegh Afshin > > Shokoufeh in the worlds of God, and extends its most loving > > sympathy to their families and friends. > > > > With loving Baha'i greetings, > > > > For Department of the Secretariat > > > > cc: The Hands of the Cause of God > > International Teaching Centre > > Boards of Counsellors > > Counsellors > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 6:52 AM Subject: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet Karen Bacquet has just published a very important article on fundamentalism in the bahai faith in a publication of the American Family Foundation, the leading cult studies foundation in the USA: "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm It's quite possible that her article will help achieve the recognition among Americans and other people, in all walks of life, that the bahai faith has many very profound problems that are regularly concealed from both government officials and the public. Bacquet discusses in her article "severe limits imposed on individual free expression," "intimidation by Baha'i officials," "excommunication and shunning," among other oppressive tactics that have become pervasive in everyday bahai life, as it is lived, versus announced theory and propaganda. Her article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html For other perceptive writings by Karen Bacquet, see both her own website and mine available below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 7:59 AM Subject: Re: Cultic Studies Journal article - American Family Foundation "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u89lvdqrs6lc9d@corp.supernews.com... > > Yes, I've heard that AFF has been very reluctant to accept that there may be > problems with psychological manipulation and harm in the Baha'i Faith -- the > impression I got from the editor is that he had picked up enough from other > sources that he was willing to accept that there could be problems there. > The Baha'i Faith has had very positive PR -- most non-Baha'is have no clue > about the Faith's authoritarian side, and have trouble believing it exists. I think you're right on all counts, especially the positive PR, which has been widely self-generated by fundamentalist bahais through paid ads in newspapers, approaching prominent people and government leaders, other efforts, etc.... It seems to me that your article goes a long way toward presenting matters as they truly stand within the bahai faith. Congrats again! It should help people interested in the truth gain a broad perspective on what's happening behind the scenes. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >My article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i >Community" is now in print and available on my website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 7:42 AM Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet I've now finished reading Ms. Bacquet's article. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the bahai faith as one of the best introductions to the many conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during the last few decades. Her article is especially informative about the very wide discrepancy between public image and lived reality within bahai circles once one becomes a member. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---- Karen Bacquet has just published a very important article on fundamentalism in the bahai faith in a publication of the American Family Foundation, the leading cult studies foundation in the USA: "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm It's quite possible that her article will help achieve the recognition among Americans and other people, in all walks of life, that the bahai faith has many very profound problems that are regularly concealed from both government officials and the public. Bacquet discusses in her article "severe limits imposed on individual free expression," "intimidation by Baha'i officials," "excommunication and shunning," among other oppressive tactics that have become pervasive in everyday bahai life, as it is lived, versus announced theory and propaganda. Her article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html For other perceptive writings by Karen Bacquet, see both her own website and mine available below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet I've found Ms. Bacquet's quotation of Steven Scholl is particularly disturbing. Though I had read it long ago, roughly about the time he first posted it to talisman9, it still remains shocking to read: "When I received a letter from a Baha'i Continental Counsellor indicating that I was under threat of being declared a Covenant-breaker, the impact on me personally was less than on my family. My wife is a Baha'i as are many of her family members, . . . The very real threat of being declared a Covenant breaker meant my wife had to face the decision of joining me as a heretic or divorcing me so that she could maintain her relationships with her family and other lifelong friends. Since [my wife] had no intention of divorcing me, the choices then extended out to her family. Her sister would not refuse to socialize with us so she would automatically be declared a covenant breaker along with her husband and children. Many of my close Baha'i friends would also be faced with the decision of maintaining friendships or joining me as a heretic. The whole thing is absurd and quite medieval. But it does raise the issue which you point out so well; how anyone would want to belong to a group which is willing to act this way and be so cruel is beyond me. That is why I voluntarily left the religion. Not in order to escape punishment but because the Baha'i community had become such an unhealthy place spiritually. I was terribly saddened that my spiritual home of 25 years had turned into a prison and nightmare." Quoted by Karen Bacquet in "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html [60] Scholl, Steven. (2000). April 26 post to talisman9@yahoogroups.com. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Scandal Gap... Randy, All joking aside, don't rule anything out.... https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Antinomies.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:_nsh8.4178$tL.3558@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... > Robert > > What is becoming increasing clear today is that the Baha'i Faith has a major > gap in its relationship with the other major world religions, that gap to > which I am referring to, of course, is a SCANDAL GAP! > > I don't see how we can claim to be a major world religion if we continue to > piddle around with only minor tempest in the teapot variety of scandals. We > need something much bigger, something of national or international import, > something that will hit the headlines of newspapers and make people take > heed of Baha'i (Heh, here's a major world religion! love their scandals! > maybe I should join!). > > Obviously increased secrecy at all levels of Baha'i Administrative is a sine > qua none of any such program. After all why should individual Baha'is be > kept informed of the why's and wherefores of administration? Anecdotal > evidence suggests that administration bores them anyway. And secrecy is the > father of scandal. > > But we need more then just this, we need a crash course on scandal > development throut all levels of Baha'i Administration, from the Grumpies on > the Hill to the grassroots of Kansas. To foster this scandal-ridden > environment so sorely needed by the Baha'i Community we are soon announcing > a new series of Institutes for Scandal Breeding! which will focus > exclusively on the tremendous needs for Secrecy, Authoritarianism and > Obedience in Baha'i. > > To Future Scandals, Randy > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 12:36 PM Subject: Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - Published March 7, 2002 - A Response to Baha'i Ad run February 28 Letters to the Editor Wayne Peal Observer-Eccentric Newspapers (Circulation approximately 120,000 throughout Oakland County, third wealthest county in the nation.) In response to the paid half-page ad by my fellow Baha'is in your February 28 issue, which offers a website link "for more information," I believe Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's Department of History, has a webpage of extensive and disturbing documentation that anyone interested in the Baha'i Faith should be aware of: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm In his book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." For numerous other views in balance to the paid ad O&E ran, I also recommend the over 50 megabytes of documentation on my own website, The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills [on page A10] ---- Appeared as O & E half-page page ad on February 28, 2002, on page A3: ---- The Destiny of America and the Promise of World Peace A Statement from the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' of the United States At this time of world turmoil, the United States Bahß' community offers a perspective on the destiny of America as the promoter of world peace. More than a hundred years ago, Bahß'u'llßh, the founder of the Bahß' Faith, addressing heads of state, proclaimed that the age of maturity for the entire human race had come. The unity of humankind was now to be established as the foundation of the great peace that would mark the highest stage in humanity's spiritual and social evolution. Revolutionary and world-shaking changes were therefore inevitable. The Bahß' writings state: The world is moving on. Its events are unfolding ominously and with bewildering rapidity. The whirlwind of its passions is swift and alarmingly violent. The New World is insensibly drawn into its vortex. . . . Dangers, undreamt of and unpredictable, threaten it both from within and from without. Its governments and peoples are being gradually enmeshed in the coils of the world's recurrent crises and fierce controversies. . . . The world is contracting into a neighborhood. America, willingly or unwillingly, must face and grapple with this new situation. For purposes of national security, let alone any humanitarian motive, she must assume the obligations imposed by this newly created neighborhood. Paradoxical as it may seem, her only hope of extricating herself from the perils gathering around her is to become entangled in that very web of international association which the Hand of an inscrutable Providence is weaving. The American nation, Bahß' s believe, will evolve through tests and trials to become a land of spiritual distinction and leadership, a champion of justice and unity among all peoples and nations, and a powerful servant of the cause of everlasting peace. This is the peace promised by God in the sacred texts of the world's religions. Establishing peace is not simply a matter of signing treaties and protocols; it is a complex task requiring a new level of commitment to resolving issues not customarily associated with the pursuit of peace. Universal acceptance of the spiritual principle of the oneness of humankind is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. Racism, one of the most baneful and persistent evils, is a major barrier to peace. The emancipation of women, the achievement of full equality of the sexes, is one of the most important, though less acknowledged, prerequisites of peace. The inordinate disparity between rich and poor keeps the world in a state of instability, preventing the achievement of peace. Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity as a whole. Religious strife, the cause of innumerable wars and conflicts throughout history, is a major obstacle to progress. The challenge facing the world's religious leaders is to contemplate, with hearts filled with compassion and the desire for truth, the plight of humanity, and to ask themselves whether they cannot, in humility before their God, submerge their theological differences in a great spirit of mutual forbearance that will enable them to work together for the advancement of human understanding and peace. Bahß' s pray, "May this American Democracy be the first nation to establish the foundation of international agreement. May it be the first nation to proclaim the unity of mankind. May it be the first to unfurl the standard of the Most Great Peace." During this hour of crisis, we affirm our abiding faith in the destiny of America. We know that the road to its destiny is long, thorny and tortuous, but we are confident that America will emerge from her trials undivided and undefeatable. ùNational Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' s of the United States For more information and for a free copy of the booklet "The Promise of World Peace" please visit our web site at Www.us.bahai.org or call us toll free at 1-800-22-UNITE Local Phone 248-737-4006 -- https://www.us.bahai.org/world_peace/amers_destiny.html ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 1:11 PM To: jrcole@umich.edu Subject: FYI - Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - Published March 7, 2002 - A Response to Baha'i Ad run February 28 FYI - Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - Published March 7, 2002 - A Response to Baha'i Ad run February 28 Letters to the Editor Wayne Peal Observer-Eccentric Newspapers (Circulation approximately 120,000 throughout Oakland County, third wealthest county in the nation.Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, etc.) In response to the paid half-page ad by my fellow Baha'is in your February 28 issue, which offers a website link "for more information," I believe Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's Department of History, has a webpage of extensive and disturbing documentation that anyone interested in the Baha'i Faith should be aware of: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm In his book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." For numerous other views in balance to the paid ad O&E ran, I also recommend the over 50 megabytes of documentation on my own website, The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills [on page A10] ---- Appeared as O & E half-page page ad on February 28, 2002, on page A3: ---- The Destiny of America and the Promise of World Peace A Statement from the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' of the United States At this time of world turmoil, the United States Bahß' community offers a perspective on the destiny of America as the promoter of world peace. More than a hundred years ago, Bahß'u'llßh, the founder of the Bahß' Faith, addressing heads of state, proclaimed that the age of maturity for the entire human race had come. The unity of humankind was now to be established as the foundation of the great peace that would mark the highest stage in humanity's spiritual and social evolution. Revolutionary and world-shaking changes were therefore inevitable. The Bahß' writings state: The world is moving on. Its events are unfolding ominously and with bewildering rapidity. The whirlwind of its passions is swift and alarmingly violent. The New World is insensibly drawn into its vortex. . . . Dangers, undreamt of and unpredictable, threaten it both from within and from without. Its governments and peoples are being gradually enmeshed in the coils of the world's recurrent crises and fierce controversies. . . . The world is contracting into a neighborhood. America, willingly or unwillingly, must face and grapple with this new situation. For purposes of national security, let alone any humanitarian motive, she must assume the obligations imposed by this newly created neighborhood. Paradoxical as it may seem, her only hope of extricating herself from the perils gathering around her is to become entangled in that very web of international association which the Hand of an inscrutable Providence is weaving. The American nation, Bahß' s believe, will evolve through tests and trials to become a land of spiritual distinction and leadership, a champion of justice and unity among all peoples and nations, and a powerful servant of the cause of everlasting peace. This is the peace promised by God in the sacred texts of the world's religions. Establishing peace is not simply a matter of signing treaties and protocols; it is a complex task requiring a new level of commitment to resolving issues not customarily associated with the pursuit of peace. Universal acceptance of the spiritual principle of the oneness of humankind is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. Racism, one of the most baneful and persistent evils, is a major barrier to peace. The emancipation of women, the achievement of full equality of the sexes, is one of the most important, though less acknowledged, prerequisites of peace. The inordinate disparity between rich and poor keeps the world in a state of instability, preventing the achievement of peace. Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity as a whole. Religious strife, the cause of innumerable wars and conflicts throughout history, is a major obstacle to progress. The challenge facing the world's religious leaders is to contemplate, with hearts filled with compassion and the desire for truth, the plight of humanity, and to ask themselves whether they cannot, in humility before their God, submerge their theological differences in a great spirit of mutual forbearance that will enable them to work together for the advancement of human understanding and peace. Bahß' s pray, "May this American Democracy be the first nation to establish the foundation of international agreement. May it be the first nation to proclaim the unity of mankind. May it be the first to unfurl the standard of the Most Great Peace." During this hour of crisis, we affirm our abiding faith in the destiny of America. We know that the road to its destiny is long, thorny and tortuous, but we are confident that America will emerge from her trials undivided and undefeatable. ùNational Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' s of the United States For more information and for a free copy of the booklet "The Promise of World Peace" please visit our web site at Www.us.bahai.org or call us toll free at 1-800-22-UNITE Local Phone 248-737-4006 -- https://www.us.bahai.org/world_peace/amers_destiny.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: WARNING - Re: BeliefNet.com Design Complete for Baha'i Community Area There's a fundamentalist bahai who has recently gotten his/herself into the "moderators" chair and is deleting messages from the > Baha'i Faith Challenge & Critique area. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:53 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Scandal Gap... "John R MacLeod" wrote in message news:a68dsg$ch3ov$1@ID-73584.news.dfncis.de... > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:a67pa2$cbqkb$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Antinomies.htm > > > > I thoroughly enjoyed this essay. I hope you write many more such. Thanks John, I think of it, though, as a thematic commonplace book, excerpts, passages, quotations, vignettes, my own and others, resonating around ineradicable antinomies.... Enough prose for me for a while. Can't get enough lived tension into it. Much prefer poetry for that reason, though fewer readers can grapple with and understand it, especially among my fellow bahais, given their rigid and inflexible intellects.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 7:16 AM Subject: Re: Cultic Studies Journal article - American Family Foundation "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u8f3llistg0oce@corp.supernews.com... > > I'd like to thank everyone here for their kind comments about my article. > So far, the feedback I've gotten everywhere has been more positive than > negative. It has been very exciting for me to break into print at long last; > I never would have dreamed, when I started writing that I'd be able to be > published in a journal like this. I'm really hoping that getting the truth > out there will have a beneficial impact in the long run, and I feel very > encouraged to continue exploring and writing about these issues. Karen, As I've said in the past, you bring a fresh perspective to the table, if you will. I enjoy most your ability to draw from your own experience because your voice rings so true and genuine when you do, not that it doesn't at other times too, you understand. You obviously understand the beast from the "inside" for that reason. I think your article too is very accessible for the non-bahai reader, doubtlessly a factor in its acceptance by Cultic Studies Journal, a significant personal achievement and one for all those who care about our fellow citizens, local and global, hearing the truth about what has been taking place behind the facade of love and unity now for decades.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > My article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" > is now in print and available on my website: > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: Ms. Bacquet - How do I buy a copy of the Cultic Studies Journal? It occurs to me that it might make an especially nice presentation copy to a particular lawyer at AOL and my own. I might pick up several others while I'm at it for editors, government officials, leaders of thought and opinion, and others who know only the distorted claims of the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais. I don't really want to take out a subscription to the journal but just purchase the single issue with your article so please be sure to include the issue number or season/2002? Please include the complete address and price info, if you would. Thanks again for all the work and effort you put into writing what I believe is and will remain a a informative and enlightening piece for a very long time to come! -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 7:17 AM Subject: Re: Ms. Bacquet - How do I buy a copy of the Cultic Studies Journal? - American Family Foundation For newcomers, the article in question is Karen Bacquet's > My article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" > is now in print and available on my website: > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:a6csbd$d9o2s$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > It occurs to me that it might make an especially nice > presentation copy to a particular lawyer at AOL and > my own. > > I might pick up several others while I'm at it for editors, > government officials, leaders of thought and opinion, > and others who know only the distorted claims of the > fundamentalists among my fellow bahais. > > I don't really want to take out a subscription to the > journal but just purchase the single issue with your > article so please be sure to include the issue number > or season/2002? > > Please include the complete address and price info, > if you would. Thanks again for all the work and effort > you put into writing what I believe is and will remain a > a informative and enlightening piece for a very long time > to come! > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 4:34 PM To: aff@affcultinfoserve.com Subject: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. I'd like to buy a printed copy of Karen Bacquet's article "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" in the Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. Unfortunately, I can't find it on your website at https://www.csj.org/pub_csj/csj_issue_index.htm I'm not really interested in the xeroxed copy but would want the original printed copy or a reprint of just her article. Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to hearing from you. Frederick Glaysher FG@comcast.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 10:55 AM Subject: ATTN - Tony Blair - Effective recognition - Baha'i Faith Validity!! "RSCHAUT" wrote in message news:20020309153225.21292.00000659@mb-cn.aol.com... > MESSAGE FROM PRIME MINISTER TONY BLAIR > > (printed in the March/April Baha'i Journal UK) > > I HAVE A CLEAR vision of a multi-cultural Britain - one which values the > contribution made by each of our ethnic, cultural and faith communities. I > am determined to see a truly dynamic society, in which people from different > ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds can live and work together, > whilst retaining their distinctive identities, in an atmosphere of mutual > respect and understanding. British Baha'is make a significant contribution > towards achieving this vision and we are a stronger better country because > of it. It is particularly important that we celebrate the contribution of > the Baha'i faith to the stability and prosperity of British Society as a > whole. I am very much encouraged by the vision the Baha'i community > demonstrates in recognising the power of interfaith dialogue and the > importance of all citizens fulfilling their potential. Your community has a > vibrancy which is well demonstrated by the recent opening of the Baha'i > Gardens on Mount Carmel in Israel. It is an outstanding monument to your > faith. > [signed Tony Blair] > Tony Blair ought to read Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now in the UK and elsewhere regarding the bahai faith: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: Re: ATTN - Tony Blair - Effective recognition - Baha'i Faith Validity!! "RSCHAUT" wrote in message news:20020309153225.21292.00000659@mb-cn.aol.com... > MESSAGE FROM PRIME MINISTER TONY BLAIR > > (printed in the March/April Baha'i Journal UK) > > I HAVE A CLEAR vision of a multi-cultural Britain - one which values the > contribution made by each of our ethnic, cultural and faith communities. I > am determined to see a truly dynamic society, in which people from different > ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds can live and work together, > whilst retaining their distinctive identities, in an atmosphere of mutual > respect and understanding. British Baha'is make a significant contribution > towards achieving this vision and we are a stronger better country because > of it. It is particularly important that we celebrate the contribution of > the Baha'i faith to the stability and prosperity of British Society as a > whole. I am very much encouraged by the vision the Baha'i community > demonstrates in recognising the power of interfaith dialogue and the > importance of all citizens fulfilling their potential. Your community has a > vibrancy which is well demonstrated by the recent opening of the Baha'i > Gardens on Mount Carmel in Israel. It is an outstanding monument to your > faith. > [signed Tony Blair] > Tony Blair ought to read Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now in the UK and elsewhere regarding the bahai faith: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Re: ATTN - Tony Blair - Effective recognition - Baha'i Faith Validity!! "RSCHAUT" wrote in message news:20020309153225.21292.00000659@mb-cn.aol.com... > MESSAGE FROM PRIME MINISTER TONY BLAIR > > (printed in the March/April Baha'i Journal UK) > > I HAVE A CLEAR vision of a multi-cultural Britain - one which values the > contribution made by each of our ethnic, cultural and faith communities. I > am determined to see a truly dynamic society, in which people from different > ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds can live and work together, > whilst retaining their distinctive identities, in an atmosphere of mutual > respect and understanding. British Baha'is make a significant contribution > towards achieving this vision and we are a stronger better country because > of it. It is particularly important that we celebrate the contribution of > the Baha'i faith to the stability and prosperity of British Society as a > whole. I am very much encouraged by the vision the Baha'i community > demonstrates in recognising the power of interfaith dialogue and the > importance of all citizens fulfilling their potential. Your community has a > vibrancy which is well demonstrated by the recent opening of the Baha'i > Gardens on Mount Carmel in Israel. It is an outstanding monument to your > faith. > [signed Tony Blair] > Tony Blair ought to read Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now in the UK and elsewhere regarding the bahai faith: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 7:01 AM Subject: bahai - New Mexico LAWSUIT against bahai institutions for bahai - New Mexico LAWSUIT against bahai institutions for bahai - New Mexico LAWSUIT against bahai institutions for bahai - New Mexico LAWSUIT against bahai institutions for bahai - New Mexico LAWSUIT against bahai institutions for FRAUD & LIBEL 3/2/2001 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/NMLawsuit.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/NMLawsuitResponse.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/NMLawsuitAttorney.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AmicusC.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 7:02 AM Subject: Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements, Vol. 6, No. 1 (February 2002) https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol6/salmuhj.htm see also https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Censorship of Salmani's Memoirs by the Baha'i Authorities: Historical Documents from 1982 From materials in the private collections of Juan R. I. Cole ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 20 September 1982 Kalimat Press 10889 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 270 Los Angeles, California 90024 U.S.A. Dear Baha’i Friends, On 31 August 1982 the Universal House of Justice received a letter from Mr. Juan Cole expressing concern aver a number of points connected with its decision that certain passages, of the Salmani memoirs should not be published at this time. Shortly afterwards it was informed that Mr. . . . was also writing on this subject, and it decided to await the arrival of his letter before replying. However, Mr. Roger White has now shared with the House of Justice extracts from a personal letter he has received from Mr. . . . , and it has instructed us to send you the following clarification and comments without further delay. As you will recall from the letter we wrote to you on behalf of the Universal House of Justice on 19 August 1980, the special committee that the National Spiritual Assembly of' the United States had been asked to appoint to review Persian manuscripts was also given the responsibility of advising on the timeliness and wisdom of publishing such texts. The House of Justice then presumed that the Salmani memoirs were going through this process. In June 1982, however, one of the friends wrote to the House of Justice expressing his great concern at learning that the entire text of the Salmani memoirs was being copied out with the intent of publishing them. On receipt of this letter an enquiry was immediately made by telephone to Mr. Darakhshani, the secretary of the recently appointed reviewing committee for Persian publications, and he was asked to draw to your attention the unwisdom of publishing the book in full at this time. This was confirmed in a letter to Mr. Darakhshani on 30 June 1982. Your two cables of 1 and 15 July then arrived informing the House of Justice that, not only had the book been passed by review of both the Persian original and the English translation, but that it was actually /Cont'd.... Kalimat Press 20 September 1982 Los Angeles, California Page two at the printers. Realizing the urgency of the matter and aware that, apparently, the earlier committee appointed by the National Spiritual Assembly had not appreciated the problems of timeliness presented by this publication, the House of Justice instructed an ad hoc committee to immediately identify those few passages which were objectionable and to send them post‑haste to Mr. Darakhshani so that the proofs could be corrected and the printing go forward. The House of Justice greatly regrets that it had to intervene at the last minute in this way, and since it is clear that Kalimat Press had faithfully followed all the requirements for review, the House of Justice will pay the additional costs incurred as a result of the last‑minute changes. In addition to the general question, Mr. Cole in his letter has queried the reason for the excision of a number of passages. At the moment the House of Justice has before it only the original Persian manuscript, therefore it would appreciate your sending at your earliest convenience a copy of the typescript or proofs of the book, showing both the Persian and the English and whatever notes and footnotes you have added, so that it can consider the passages in detail and reply to the points that Mr. Cole has raised. With loving Baha'i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The National Spiritual of the United States , Mr. Juan Cole THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 2 December 1982 Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Department of Medieval and Modern History Lucknow University Lucknow 226007 India Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has now been able to compare the published edition of the Salmani memoirs with the Persian manuscript: and to consider the passages which the ad hoc committee had marked for deletion. It is clear that Kalimat Press scrupulously followed all the provisions for review of this book before publication, but, unfortunately the process has been dogged by a series of' misunderstandings and confusions. The House of Justice has instructed us to send you the following comments on the points raised in your letter of 13 August 1982. When the early correspondence took place between the World Centre and Kalimat Press concerning this publication, the House of Justice was relying on the discretion of the appropriate committee in the United States to check not only the normal review aspects, but also the timeliness and wisdom of such a publication. It did not itself check the manuscript. If it had done so it now concludes that it would not have given permission for its publication or translation at this time, for reasons which will be explained below. In June 1982, concern was expressed to the Universal House of Justice about the possible publication in full, in Persian, of these memoirs, and action was taken in July, in great haste, to eliminate the most harmful passages so that the publication of the book, which was already at the press, could proceed. Unfortunately at that time the ad hoc committee was unaware of the earlier correspondence and of the fact that certain passages had already been quoted in translation in books by Mr. Hasan Balyuzi and Mr. Adib Taherzadeh. Kalimat Press, in its turn, knowing of the prior publication of these passages, and not understanding the reasons for the proposed deletions, has, in fact, retained the larger part of the objectionable passages. The publication is a fait accompli and the House of Justice has therefore decided to permit it to stand, but not to) permit the publication of the Persian text which, in fact, would be more damaging than the English version. Cont'd/.... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 2 To the points of substance which you have raised concerning the publication of historical texts, the House of Justice instructs us to explain the following In order to preserve basic information and historical materials for the use of future historians, the beloved Guardian instructed the communities throughout Iran to record the history of the Faith in their localities, and also gave instructions for the memoirs of a number of early believers to be written down and preserved. This was not a new advice and many friends, eyewitnesses of certain events, in the lives of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l‑Baha, had already committed their reminiscences to writing. The memoirs of Ustad Muhammad‑`Aliy‑i‑Salmani are among, these and were written down from his spoken recollections in his old age. There is no question whatsoever of suppressing such records ‑ on the contrary, the whole purpose of having them made was to preserve them, and they have been made available to Baha'i historians, such as Mr. Balyuzi and Mr. Taherzadeh for use in their work. When excerpts are translated and published in such works, they are placed in context, related to other records and, where necessary, annotated and commented on. You will readily agree that such a use is not the same as publication in full, even if supplementary footnotes are added, and does not carry the same implications. . In time entire collections of early documents of the Faith will be published in scholarly editions for general use. An initial step in suclbrl a process is Dr. Moojan Momen's admirable book "The Babi and Baha’i Religions, 1.844‑1944 ‑ Some Contemporary Western Accounts". Additional considerations, however, have to be weighed in publishing texts by Baha'i writers. At the present time the general public, even if it has heard of the Faith, is largely uninformed or misinformed. An increasing amount of misinformation is continually being disseminated by opponents of the Faith, both in the east and in the west. The principal task of the Baha’is at the present time ‑ and especially of Baha’i scholars ‑ is to present a true picture of the Faith to the general public and to relate the Baha’i teachings to the concerns and problems of mankind. When a Baha'i publishing house issues a translation of a document such as Salmani's memoirs, the implication to an average reader is that the Baha’is consider this particular account worthy of publication, and, in the absence of adequate footnotes or commentary to the contrary, the reader will assume that Salmani's actions and statements are approved by Baha’is and are accurate portrayals of the Faith. After all, Salmani was a close companion of Baha’u’llah, comparable in the eyes of a Christian reader with one of the early disciples of Christ. Viewed in this light, certain of Salmani's accounts are misleading or Cont'd/ Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 3 unworthy and, apart from distorting the Faith for the average reader can provide material for the enemies of the Faith who at the present time are seizing every opportunity to attack the Cause and blacken its reputation. To take a few examples from the passages queried by the ad hoc committee: p. 17. There is a brief account of some believers from Sultanabad saying to Baha'u'llah "You being God, Uncle, why do You give us such a hard row to hoe?" It is an old accusation against the Baha’is, especially from Muslims, that we regard Baha'u'llah as God. To print such a story without an appropriate commentary gives fuel to our Muslim enemies and makes the Faith look ridiculous to a western reader. Unfortunately Kalimat Press, not realizing the reason for the objection, let the objectionable part stand and deleted a parenthetical comment "The Shi`is, however, were very hostile", which is entirely innocuous. p.30. There are some virtually incomprehensible comments about Mirza Aqa Jan’s head, which are of no historical importance but are unpleasant and unworthy. 3. pp. 31‑34. There are three unpleasant stories recounted by Salmani to illustrate Azal's gluttony. Shoghi Effendi was always very careful in his accounts of Azal to confine his strictures to his truly infamous conduct. He never stooped to making personal criticisms of such a nature, which are unworthy , Publication of such stories in the context of an annotated edition of a historical document for scholarly study is one thing; publication in a book for the general reader is quite another. Again, unfortunately, Kalimat Press did not appreciate the reason for the committee's objection and published the whole passage apart from a couple of brief deletions which were of no significance. 3. p. 34. There is the account. of a disagreement between Baha'u’llah and Azal over the shaving of Azal’s son's head‑another unworthy story, the point of which is obscure. There are others of a similar character. The passages which have already been published in translation, such as Azal's attempt to persuade Salmani to murder Baha'u'llah, provide striking examples of the profound difference between publication in the context of a properly balanced historical exposition, and publication as unadorned parts of a narrative. In sum, to a knowledgeable Baha’i reader, Salmani’s memoirs are a graphic illustration of the overwhelming problems with which Baha'u'llah had to deal both from His enemies and because of the actions of some of His own Cont'd/ .... Mr. Juan Ricardo Cole Page 4 faithful followers; but to an uninformed reader they give a misleading and distorted picture of the Faith and of Baha'u'llah Himself. With loving Baha’i greetings, Loraine Kerfoot For Department of the Secretariat cc: The International Teaching Centre National Assembly of the United States Excerpts from contemporaneous responses to the UHJ letter to J. Cole from other Baha’i intellectuals who saw it: 1) Firuz Kazemzadeh, member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the U.S. and Yale historian, was extremely upset about the tampering with a primary source and offered to write a letter of support for Kalimat Press in the affair. 2) Professor Amin Banani of UCLA, who had written the introduction to the Salmani memoir, insisted that his name be removed from the introduction because he declined to be associated with a censored document. 3) Another intellectual observed the following: It is simply untrue to suppose that the average reader is incapable of distinguishing between the statements and actions of an individual believer and the official positions of the institutions of the Faith. This is an elementary distinction of the kind which is made every day by persons in all walks of life. This must be particularly true of a manuscript of personal memoirs which is over seventy years old. Using the House's example of the early disciples of Christ, many of their failings and misunderstandings are clearly recorded in the Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles. Christians (or others) do not automatically assume that these shortcomings are approved by modern Churches or are accurate portrayals of Christian standards. What sane reader of the Gospels would propose that since Peter denied Christ three times or because he used his sword to sever the ear of a Roman soldier in the garden of Gethsemane, these must be Christian teachings or approved examples of Christian conduct? If anything, the current policies of review which the House is applying will serve to blur what would otherwise be a perfectly obvious distinction. Since the House now insists that any published personal memoirs, or other statements of personal opinion on the Faith by Baha'is, must actually reflect official policy and contain no statements or reminiscences that run counter to present practice the argument that any individual opinion constitutes official policy (which would otherwise appear absurd) gains some force. Of course, it is just the opposite impression. which the House wants to make. For instance, the only reason that anyone might suppose that Salmani's particular account of Baha'u'llah's exiles might be considered by Baha'is_to be of some special significance is that it is the only one that has been allowed in print. If there were several personal accounts of this kind available, from different points of view, the notion that Salmani's memoir is somehow special would be held by no one. . . The letter to Juan Cole states that Salmani's account was published without footnotes or commentary. Both were provided in [Kalimat’s] edition . . . The intention of the House to protect the reputation of the Faith is certainly to be appreciated, but it seems clear that this reputation is more likely to be blackened by present policies of strict censorship than by anything in the Salmani memoirs—not only for non‑Baha'is, but also for loyal believers who find such policies difficult to understand Moreover, such policies play right into the hands of critics of the Faith (such as Denis MacEoin in England) who are hard at work to portray the Faith as an anti‑democratic, totalitarian, rigidly authoritarian religion, which has falsified and distorted its own history. To addresss the specific objections of the ad hoc committee: 2. It is clear that Baha'u'llah never claimed to be the Godhead, and this can be conclusively demonstrated by reference to His own Writings. On the other hand, it is also clear that there were many Baha'is who believed that He was. (And there certainly still are!) Numerous references in the published works of E. G. Browne indicate this clearly. This could easily be proven, by any scholar who bothered to try. So, the offending sentence in Salmani's memoirs adds nothing to what is not already known. Furthermore, Baha'is know that in a certain sense we believe that Baha'u'llah is God, as is explained in the Iqan. Especially since the incident is not without humor, was intended as an amusing story, and involves an ignorant villager (and in the context: of the introduction of the book), it seems unlikely that it would fuel our enemies or make us seem ridiculous. 2. The comments which Salmani makes about Mirza Aqa Jan's head are admittedly curious. However, I would query the statement that they are of nc historical importance. If we could understand what the comments meant they may be of great interest. Salmani was, after all, a barber, and he may have recorded something about Mirza Aqa Jan's head that others have failed to mention. 3 & 4. The truly extraordinary standard for forbidding the publication of passages‑‑that they are "unpleasant" or "unworthy" ‑‑appears to establish a new standard for the review of materials which was not used by the Guardian, or previously used by the House of Justice. Such a new standard raises many questions: Salmani can hardly have been expected to conform to standards of style and choice of material found in the Guardian's writings, since he was writing before the Guardian began his ministry. Beyond this, there.mu8t be room in Baha'i literature for different kinds of books. Not all can be similar to the works of Shoghi Effendi. In this case, we were publishing the personal memories and pilgrim's notes of an illiterate barber. It is certainly unfair to compare them to the writings of the Guardian. The objection that a particular passage is "unpleasant" or if unworthy" is extremely vague. It is difficult to see how a reviewing committee could be expected to apply such a standard. It could provide license to forbid the publication of almost anything. The other question, of course, is “impleasant" to whom? I do not find anything in the memoirs unpleasant or unworthy of publication. Neither did the translator, or the author of the introduction to the book. Nor did two Separate reviewing committee of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, one Persian and one American, find anything of this kind in the manuscript. Concerning Azal's plot to murder Baha'u'llah‑‑the descriptions of which the ad‑hoc committee felt should not be included in the translation of Salmani's memoirs, since these descriptions had already been published in translation in two separate books published by George Ronald, it would have been truly remarkable to omit them from a translation of the memoirs as a whole. It was impossible for me to understand how such a request could be justified. The letter of the House of Justice states that there is no question of suppressing records such as Salmani's memoirs. The dictionary defines the word suppress as: "2: to keep from public knowledge: as a: to keep secret b: to stop or prohibit the publica­tion or revelation of." There can be little argument that the House of Justice intends to suppress certain parts of Salmani's memoirs. That it does not intend to do so forever is encouraging, but it does not change the current condition under which Baha'i publishers must operate. Nor will the intention to release such information in the future protect us much from the attacks of scholars or other critics who wish to criticize us on this point. 4) Juan Cole wrote the UHJ on 9 January 1983 in New Delhi: I remain convinced that the policy outlined by the Universal House of Justice is an unfortunate one and that time will prove it incorrect. At that point, I am sure that the Supreme Institution will, on the basis of further information and considerations, abandon its current stance. I firmly believe that it is essentially dishonest to delete passages from manuscripts when they are published, whether in the original or in translation, and no matter how temporarily. I feel that it is also morally wrong for a public institution to withhold documents, particularly ones over thirty years old, from scrutiny by the public. Because I believe that such acts are wrong in principle, no particular justifications for them can strike me as wholly convincing. I further fear that such a policy of secretiveness and bowdlerization will inevitably besmirch the fair name of the Faith of Baha'u'llah. I am convinced that the Baha'i Faith has nothing to fear from the historical records that have survived the nineteenth century. It, is too sublime, too true to ever be sullied by anything mere human beings have written or done, We Baha’is should face the historical record, not with fear, dissimulation and blue pencils, but with unshakeable certitude of the purity of our Cause. Final note: The example given by the UHJ of historical accounts being allowed to be published was Moojan Momen’s The Babi and Baha’i Religions: Some Contemporary Western Accounts (Oxford: George Ronald, 1980). In fact, this book was also censored and important material in the British Archives that the editor had planned to include was taken out at the UHJ’s insistence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi, and Baha'i Movements Return to H-Bahai Digital Publications Return to H-Bahai Home Page Links to pages with similar resources ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:47 PM To: sscholl@jeffnet.org Subject: Forwarded as requested - FYI - Re Maneck, Misrepresentations Sorry to disturb your peace.... Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dermod Ryder" Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 4:23 PM Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet > > "Susan Maneck " wrote in message > news:20020311031041.14637.00000887@mb-fc.aol.com... > > >I've found Ms. Bacquet's quotation of Steven Scholl > > >is particularly disturbing. > > > > The real reason that Steve Scholl was so concerned is that at the > time he > > received this letter from a Counselor he had already planned to do > this big > > expose in the press (the Rankin article.) Steve was well aware that > such an > > attack on the Faith after having received such a warning from the > Counsellor > > would assuredly result in his being declared a Covenant breaker. > > > > If he had not been so determined to go forward with this, there > would not have > > been a problem. > > Hey Maneck, > > You're a goddamn liar! > > Would somebody be so kind as to forward this so that there can be no > excuse for her not responding to it. > > I'll repeat the messageso that she understands it loud and clear - > Maneck is a liar about this as so much else like the phantom Covenant > Breaker makers on Zuhur. > > > > ---------- From: community@staff.beliefnet.com[SMTP:community@staff.beliefnet.com] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 11:27 PM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Repetitive posts Dear Beliefnet member: While you are valued as a member of the Beliefnet community, you have been told repeatedly why certain posts have been deleted for spamming or repetitive posting. You have again chosen to post "Newcomers Start Here" although it has been deleted numerous times for spamming. This is flagrant violation of Beliefnet's ROC. Please limit your threads/posts to those that invite discussion by others of a given topic. Thank you, "WC" Baha'i Forum Host ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 10:58 AM To: aff@affcultinfoserve.com Subject: Re: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. Sorry to bother you again. I somehow accidentally deleted your email reply with address and purchase price information. Is there any chance you could forward your message to me? Thank you. Frederick Glaysher FG@comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 4:34 PM Subject: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. > I'd like to buy a printed copy of Karen Bacquet's article "Enemies > Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" in > the Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. Unfortunately, > I can't find it on your website at > https://www.csj.org/pub_csj/csj_issue_index.htm > > I'm not really interested in the xeroxed copy but would want > the original printed copy or a reprint of just her article. > > Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to hearing > from you. > > Frederick Glaysher > FG@comcast.net > > > ---------- From: AFF[SMTP:aff@affcultinfoserve.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:56 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: RE: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal,Volume 18, No. 1. You can purchase the bound volume for $15, using the address below. Specify what you want; don't assume we'll remember this communication! CC or check. Regards, Michael Langone, Ph.D. AFF (American Family Foundation) P.O. Box 2265 Bonita Springs, FL 34133 Phone: 941-514-3081 fax: 732-352-6818 E-mail: aff@affcultinfoserve.com Web site: www.csj.org Bookstore: www.cultinfobooks.com - Subscribe to our Cultic Studies Review to keep abreast of developments in this field. AFF Annual Conference; June 14-15, 2002, Orlando, FL - go to www.cultinfobooks.com and click on "Conference" button for details. (Includes information on preconference workshops for former group members and for family members.) Weekend workshop for former group members - Estes Park, Colorado - July 12-14, 2002 - Go to www.cultinfobooks.com and click on "Conference" button for details. -----Original Message----- From: FG [mailto:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 12:59 PM To: AFF Subject: Re: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal,Volume 18, No. 1. Sorry to bother you again. I somehow accidentally deleted your email reply with address and purchase price information. Is there any chance you could forward your message to me? Thank you. Frederick Glaysher FG@comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 4:34 PM Subject: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. > I'd like to buy a printed copy of Karen Bacquet's article "Enemies > Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" in > the Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, No. 1. Unfortunately, I can't > find it on your website at > https://www.csj.org/pub_csj/csj_issue_index.htm > > I'm not really interested in the xeroxed copy but would want the > original printed copy or a reprint of just her article. > > Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to hearing > from you. > > Frederick Glaysher > FG@comcast.net > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Ms. Bacquet - How do I buy a copy of the Cultic Studies Journal? FYI - $15.00 and address below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----- Original Message ----- From: "AFF" To: "Frederick Glaysher" Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:56 AM Subject: RE: PURCHASE REQUEST - Karen Bacquet - Cultic Studies Journal,Volume 18, No. 1. You can purchase the bound volume for $15, using the address below. Specify what you want; don't assume we'll remember this communication! CC or check. Regards, Michael Langone, Ph.D. AFF (American Family Foundation) P.O. Box 2265 Bonita Springs, FL 34133 Phone: 941-514-3081 fax: 732-352-6818 E-mail: aff@affcultinfoserve.com Web site: www.csj.org Bookstore: www.cultinfobooks.com - Subscribe to our Cultic Studies Review to keep abreast of developments in this field. AFF Annual Conference; June 14-15, 2002, Orlando, FL - go to www.cultinfobooks.com and click on "Conference" button for details. (Includes information on preconference workshops for former group members and for family members.) Weekend workshop for former group members - Estes Park, Colorado - July 12-14, 2002 - Go to www.cultinfobooks.com and click on "Conference" button for details. "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:u8k6bh16th5o5a@corp.supernews.com... > Dear Fred, > > CSJ has been an annual publication for the last few years, so even if you > subscribed, you'd only get the one copy for this year. From looking over the > site, it looks like that this year's CSJ will be the last, and will be > succeeded by an online peer-reviewed journal called Cultic Studies Review. > I can't seem to find the subscription information for CSJ anymore, but as I > recall it was $18. > > My article is in the 2001 volume; it came out a bit on the late side. > However, Xeroxed reprints of the entire journal are available for $10. > They've also got reprints of some individual articles, but mine does not > seem to be among them. To order, go to > https://www.csj.org/pub_csj/csj_issue_index.htm It's Volume 18, No. 1. > > Love, Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:a6csbd$d9o2s$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > It occurs to me that it might make an especially nice > > presentation copy to a particular lawyer at AOL and > > my own. > > > > I might pick up several others while I'm at it for editors, > > government officials, leaders of thought and opinion, > > and others who know only the distorted claims of the > > fundamentalists among my fellow bahais. > > > > I don't really want to take out a subscription to the > > journal but just purchase the single issue with your > > article so please be sure to include the issue number > > or season/2002? > > > > Please include the complete address and price info, > > if you would. Thanks again for all the work and effort > > you put into writing what I believe is and will remain a > > a informative and enlightening piece for a very long time > > to come! > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:32 PM Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet "When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Steve Scholl" wrote in message news:3dd19d82.0203120955.1cdc783f@posting.google.com... > Several people on this forum have fwd to me Susan Maneck's comments on > the inner workings of my mind. Susan has a history of telling the > world what I really mean and what my true motives were in relation to > events surrounding my exodus from the Baha'i community. At one point > she informed the world that it was my belief that the Baha'i covenant > went null and void in 1921 with the passing of Abdu'l-Baha, which was > a rather outrageous lie on her part. She also claimed that she was > serving as my confidant and guide in the rocky days leading up to my > resignation of membership and that she was counseling me in some way. > In short, she has lied and made misleading statements about me in the > past and this recent statement of hers is just another example of her > lack of honesty. > > She writes: > > > > The real reason that Steve Scholl was so concerned is that at the > > time he received this letter from a Counselor he had already planned to do > > this big expose in the press (the Rankin article.) Steve was well aware that > > such an attack on the Faith after having received such a warning from the > > Counsellor would assuredly result in his being declared a Covenant breaker. > > If he had not been so determined to go forward with this, there > > would not have been a problem. > > Let me emphasize that Susan Maneck has never been privy to the real > reasons for my concerns and actions. That said, I am not even clear > what she is trying to say here. The statement of mine that Karen B. > quotes in her excellent article was a simple look back at one aspect > of my thinking about the internal Baha'i culture wars a few years > after the fact. I think the statement indicates clearly that there was > no big concern on my part about possibly being declared a Baha'i > covenant breaker, that the problems associated with such a move > against me would land more on my family and friends than on me. At > that point I could have cared less what the UHJ or NSA did re: my > Baha'i rights since they had already trampled on them for years and > had acted duplicitously and in violation of their own stated > administrative principles in handling my "case". > > Furthermore, I had gone on record in my correspondence with the UHJ > and Counsl Birkland that I would not hesitate to discuss their actions > with "people of capacity" outside of the Baha'i community and with the > media, and I had already passed on information to several religion > writers for major newspapers about what was going on inside the Baha'i > community. This was not something I was trying to hide from them. > > I don't know what Maneck's last sentence is referring to. Couns. > Birkland's threatening letter to me made it clear that if I said or > did *anything* he or his handlers disapproved of then I would be > declared a CBer. The list of my Baha'i crimes included theological > deviations and not accepting EVERY WORD from the pen of Baha'u'llah > and Abdu'l-Baha as true. Birkland made it clear in his letter to me > that he did not think I was a Baha'i and that he would not hesitate to > recommend my removal from the community. > > What I understand Maneck to be saying here is that my big sin was to > talk with the media about internal Baha'i crackdowns on intellectuals > and scholars, and that if I had not planned to spill the beans to the > media "there would not have been a problem." If this is what she is > implying, then she is dead wrong. First, if I had not resigned, I > believe I would have been declared a CB because I had no intentions of > changing my beliefs based on the fundamentalist rants of the members > of the UHJ. > > But what is telling in this line of Maneckian cult thinking is what > she is really saying: The problem in her cult view of the world is > the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal Baha'i affairs so > that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place > in the Baha'i world. The great sin is ignoring the Baha'i taboo > against speaking out against internal injustices because to do so is > to tarnish the reputation of the Baha'i institutions. Good Baha'is are > expected to take their abuse in silence. If they speak out against > abuse, they are regarded as internal opposition and come under > investigation from the Baha'i Inquisition. They are villified and > threatened, even told that their status in the afterlife is threatened > if they don't change their ways. And, yes, this was a key element the > little drama that played out between the Baha'i leadership and myself. > What I told the UHJ and Birkland was something like this: > > I know you are all excited about emerging from obscurity and taking a > larger role on the world stage. Well, that means you are also going to > be examined more closely. Your financial misdeeds, your cover ups of > sexual exploitation by Baha'i leaders, your fundamentalist leanings, > your sexist views, your 1950s view on homosexualty, are all going to > be opened up for public scrutiny. Your days of a free ride in the > media are over. > > Susan can try to nip at Karen's heels and claim that Karen's article > is flawed this way and that. But such partisan harping is only > preaching to the fundamentalist Baha'i choir. Outsiders and many > insiders will read Karen's article as a clear and honest attempt to > discuss recent Baha'i events. Susan can try to attack Karen's lack of > "methodology" or that Karen's work is not serious scholarship. But > this is laughable when one looks at Dr. Maneck's publishing career. > She has penned a few Baha'i articles of marginal value published by > internal Baha'i agencies. In short, she has one of the weakest > publishing histories I have ever seen in academics and her academic > profile is nearly nonexistent. Maneck has attempted (unsuccessfuly) to > discredit the work of Juan Cole and now Karen with her Baha'i blather. > Yet it is Juan and Karen who are publishing in refereed academic > journals, and Karen has done this as a freelance writer rather than as > a trained academic. > > Susan, if you think you really have something to say, write it up and > submit it to a non-Baha'i publisher and see if they will accept YOUR > methodology and YOUR use of sources. > > Steve Scholl ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 5:46 PM Subject: Re: FWD AOL - Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet Subj: Re: Scholl calls Maneck a Liar on talk.religion.bahai Date: 3/12/2002 5:48:53 PM Eastern Standard Time From: fg@aol.com () To: > In short, she has lied and made misleading statements about me in the >> past and this recent statement of hers is just another example of her >> lack of honesty. How about it, Susan, HAVE YOU LIED? >The problem in her cult view of the world is >> the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal Baha'i affairs so >> that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place >> in the Baha'i world. How about it, Susan, do you have a cult view of the world? >In short, she has one of the weakest >> publishing histories I have ever seen in academics and her academic >> profile is nearly nonexistent. How about it, Susan, have you published ANYTHING on an intelligent level? Frederick Glaysher Google Search Engine: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: <@aol.com> Received: from rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILINYD43-0312174853; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:48:53 -0500 Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYD54-0312174825; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:48:25 -0500 Received: from ladder07.news.aol.com (ladder07.news.aol.com [172.31.45.165]) by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with ESMTP id RAA04968; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:48:17 -0500 (EST) From: ) To: Date: 12 Mar 2002 17:47:41 EST References: <20020312173926.14740.00001315@mb-ba.aol.com> Organization: AOL https://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Scholl calls Maneck a Liar on talk.religion.bahai Message-ID: <20020312174741.14723.00001471@mb-ba.aol.com> ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:56 AM Subject: Re: FWD AOL - Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:a6nkev$ffp4h$2@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > You wanna talk to Fred? Then start by trying to understand what > grieves him. You're not going to initiate any dialogue without that. > How do I know that? Well, Fred talks to me because I have tried to > understand why he is the way he is. The lesson is Robert - stop > reading your Writings - start applying them to real situations and > take the blindfold away from your eyes. If the current status of your > Faith wasn't sick there'd be no conflict. Thinks ..... how do I help > resolve that conflict? Light appears - I ask people why they think > things are wrong! I acknowledge they have a credible point(s)! I > look for ways of amending my own views to create a harmony with them - > I look for solutions! Dermod, Thanks. I appreciate your fairness and speaking up. I've been tarred and feathered so long, it's a shock and delight to read your words! Scapegoating is a very nasty business.... Outside observers might want to reflect carefully and dispassionately on the experience of Steven Scholl, his recent posts on talk.religion.bahai, linked together at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > Now go do it! > > As ever, > > Dermod. > > PS Only through dialogue can problems be solved - not through the > kill-file. resorting to silence simply informs the world that you see > and acknowledge what your opponent says, that you cannot refute it and > that, ignorant person that you are, you will not amend your position > to create harmony. > ---------- From: Cheryl Fuller[SMTP:cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:25 PM To: FG@hotmail.com Cc: community@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards.  A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents of spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory or derogatory remarks.  The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and spamming.  It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if you think their beliefs are false. We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in theboards.  Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet messageboards and will be removed.  We have no wish to silence opposing viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom of speech onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing an idea (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we will take action against poor behavior. To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about other Beliefnet members.  Probably the best thing is to focus on ideas, rather than people.  Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. Cheryl Fuller Assistant Community Producer cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com https://www.beliefnet.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:11 AM Subject: BeliefNet.com and Fundamentalist bahai Deception Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." ----------------------- I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... Essential Reading You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the technical moderating controls of discussion. With respect and best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: FG@hotmail.com >CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 -0800 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >Message-id: >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , > >I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards. > >A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents >of >spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory >or derogatory remarks. The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you >agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts >that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and >spamming. It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet >members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if >you think their beliefs are false. > >We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >theboards. Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >messageboards and will be removed. We have no wish to silence >opposing viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom >of speech onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing >an idea (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we >will take action against poor behavior. > >To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of >your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express >your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about >other Beliefnet members. Probably the best thing is to focus on >ideas, rather than people. > >Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >https://www.beliefnet.com > ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:12 AM To: cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Re: Your posts on the Baha'i boards Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." ----------------------- I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... Essential Reading You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the technical moderating controls of discussion. With respect and best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: FG@hotmail.com >CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 -0800 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >Message-id: >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , > >I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards.  > >A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents >of >spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory >or derogatory remarks.  The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you >agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts >that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and >spamming.  It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet >members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if >you think their beliefs are false. > >We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >theboards.  Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >messageboards and will be removed.  We have no wish to silence >opposing viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom >of speech onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing >an idea (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we >will take action against poor behavior. > >To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of >your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express >your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about >other Beliefnet members.  Probably the best thing is to focus on >ideas, rather than people.  > >Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >https://www.beliefnet.com > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:12 AM To: cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Re: Your posts on the Baha'i boards Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." ----------------------- I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... Essential Reading You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the technical moderating controls of discussion. With respect and best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: FG@hotmail.com >CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 -0800 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net >[68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 >(built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> >for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >Message-id: >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , > >I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards.  > >A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents of >spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory or >derogatory remarks.  The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you agreed >when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts that malign, >vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and spamming.  It is not >necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet members, but we do insist >that you treat them with courtesy, even if you think their beliefs are >false. > >We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >theboards.  Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >messageboards and will be removed.  We have no wish to silence opposing >viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom of speech >onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing an idea (withinthe >limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we will take action against >poor behavior. > >To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of your >membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express your views >that does not include disparaging personal remarks about other Beliefnet >members.  Probably the best thing is to focus on ideas, rather than >people.  > >Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >https://www.beliefnet.com > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:43 AM Subject: Re: BeliefNet.com and Fundamentalist bahai Deception Those who wish to judge these matters for themselves may do so at https://www.beliefnet.com/boards/discussion_list.asp?boardID=5608 -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 10:04 AM To: feedback@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Bahai Message Boards feedback@staff.beliefnet.com I ask that a serious, informed, and impartial investigation into the matters I raise in my message below to Cheryl Fuller be conducted, at a higher level, if need be. At the very least, I believe it is necessary for BeliefNet, in order to protect its own best interests and reputation, to actually read and take into account the sources I recommend below. Anything less, in my opinion, will result in undue weight being given to the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais on BeliefNet. Respectfully yours, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---- Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." ----------------------- I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... Essential Reading You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the technical moderating tools of discussion. With respect and best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: FG@hotmail.com >CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 -0800 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >Message-id: >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , > >I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards. > >A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents >of >spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory >or derogatory remarks. The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you >agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts >that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and >spamming. It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet >members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if >you think their beliefs are false. > >We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >theboards. Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >messageboards and will be removed. We have no wish to silence >opposing viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom >of speech onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing >an idea (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we >will take action against poor behavior. > >To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of >your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express >your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about >other Beliefnet members. Probably the best thing is to focus on >ideas, rather than people. > >Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >https://www.beliefnet.com > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 10:07 AM Subject: Letters to the Editor - Observer-Eccentric Newspapers - Circulation approximately 120,000 Letters to the Editor Wayne Peal Observer-Eccentric Newspapers (Circulation approximately 120,000 throughout Oakland County, third wealthest county in the nation.) In response to the paid half-page ad by my fellow Baha'is in your February 28 issue, which offers a website link "for more information," I believe Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's Department of History, has a webpage of extensive and disturbing documentation that anyone interested in the Baha'i Faith should be aware of: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhdoc.htm In his book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." For numerous other views in balance to the paid ad O&E ran, I also recommend the over 50 megabytes of documentation on my own website, The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills [on page A10] ---- Appeared as O & E half-page page ad on February 28, 2002, on page A3: ---- The Destiny of America and the Promise of World Peace A Statement from the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' of the United States At this time of world turmoil, the United States Bahß' community offers a perspective on the destiny of America as the promoter of world peace. More than a hundred years ago, Bahß'u'llßh, the founder of the Bahß' Faith, addressing heads of state, proclaimed that the age of maturity for the entire human race had come. The unity of humankind was now to be established as the foundation of the great peace that would mark the highest stage in humanity's spiritual and social evolution. Revolutionary and world-shaking changes were therefore inevitable. The Bahß' writings state: The world is moving on. Its events are unfolding ominously and with bewildering rapidity. The whirlwind of its passions is swift and alarmingly violent. The New World is insensibly drawn into its vortex. . . . Dangers, undreamt of and unpredictable, threaten it both from within and from without. Its governments and peoples are being gradually enmeshed in the coils of the world's recurrent crises and fierce controversies. . . . The world is contracting into a neighborhood. America, willingly or unwillingly, must face and grapple with this new situation. For purposes of national security, let alone any humanitarian motive, she must assume the obligations imposed by this newly created neighborhood. Paradoxical as it may seem, her only hope of extricating herself from the perils gathering around her is to become entangled in that very web of international association which the Hand of an inscrutable Providence is weaving. The American nation, Bahß' s believe, will evolve through tests and trials to become a land of spiritual distinction and leadership, a champion of justice and unity among all peoples and nations, and a powerful servant of the cause of everlasting peace. This is the peace promised by God in the sacred texts of the world's religions. Establishing peace is not simply a matter of signing treaties and protocols; it is a complex task requiring a new level of commitment to resolving issues not customarily associated with the pursuit of peace. Universal acceptance of the spiritual principle of the oneness of humankind is essential to any successful attempt to establish world peace. Racism, one of the most baneful and persistent evils, is a major barrier to peace. The emancipation of women, the achievement of full equality of the sexes, is one of the most important, though less acknowledged, prerequisites of peace. The inordinate disparity between rich and poor keeps the world in a state of instability, preventing the achievement of peace. Unbridled nationalism, as distinguished from a sane and legitimate patriotism, must give way to a wider loyalty, to the love of humanity as a whole. Religious strife, the cause of innumerable wars and conflicts throughout history, is a major obstacle to progress. The challenge facing the world's religious leaders is to contemplate, with hearts filled with compassion and the desire for truth, the plight of humanity, and to ask themselves whether they cannot, in humility before their God, submerge their theological differences in a great spirit of mutual forbearance that will enable them to work together for the advancement of human understanding and peace. Bahß' s pray, "May this American Democracy be the first nation to establish the foundation of international agreement. May it be the first nation to proclaim the unity of mankind. May it be the first to unfurl the standard of the Most Great Peace." During this hour of crisis, we affirm our abiding faith in the destiny of America. We know that the road to its destiny is long, thorny and tortuous, but we are confident that America will emerge from her trials undivided and undefeatable. ùNational Spiritual Assembly of the Bahß' s of the United States For more information and for a free copy of the booklet "The Promise of World Peace" please visit our web site at Www.us.bahai.org or call us toll free at 1-800-22-UNITE Local Phone 248-737-4006 -- https://www.us.bahai.org/world_peace/amers_destiny.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 7:10 AM Subject: Re: The Big Five (Was Article in American...) "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:MCol8.9628$9F2.9097@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... > >Essentially Fred is right, these people are only guilty of acting > in a manner that they think is best for the Baha'i faith according to their > own conscience. Thanks for saying so, Randy. "When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. "BECAUSE no People can be truly happy, though under the greatest Enjoyment of Civil Liberties, if abridged of the Freedom of their Consciences." --William Penn, 1701 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Penn.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 5:15 PM Subject: Re: Christian Puritan Notions of 'Liberty' and Baha'u'llah's Notion of 'Liberty' Nima, Thanks for bringing this fine quotation to our attention. Some might want to compare William Penn's Charter of Privileges from 1701, shortingly after Cotton Mather: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Penn.htm I don't believe Mather's distinctions are at all incompatible with Baha'u'llah's. Quite the contrary, both sound the classical notes that enlighten intelligent reflection on Liberty throughout human experience.... Hope you don't mind my adding Mather to Penn, for my own delectation, if no one else's. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a7h16k$11bf$1@austar-news.austar.net.au... > In the first volume of Alexis De Tocqueville's (d.1859) magisterial > *Democracy in America* (Mansfield/ > Winthrop edition/translation) p.42 (Chicago: 2000), he quotes the following > extract from Cotton Mather's *Magnalia Christi Americana, or, the > Ecclesiastical History of New England* vol. 1 116-117 (Hartford: 1820) > regarding the Puritan idea of 'Liberty'. To wit, > > "...There is a liberty of corrupt nature, which is affected by men and > beasts, to do what they list; and this liberty is inconsistent with > authority, impatient of all restraint; by this liberty, Sumus Omnes > Deteriores [we are inferior]; `tis the grand enemy of truth and peace, and > all the the ordinances of God are bent against it. But there is a civil, a > moral, a federal liberty, which is the proper end and object of authority; > it is a liberty for that only which is just and good; for this liberty you > are to stand with the hazard of your very lives." > > > The implications of the argument made in this extract sounds to me awfully > like the one made by Mirza Husayn `Ali Baha'u'llah (d.1892) in his Kitab > al-Aqdas (para.122-24) regarding 'hurriyyeh' (liberty). To wit, > > " Consider the pettiness of men's minds. They ask for that which injureth > them, > and cast away the thing that profiteth them. They are, indeed, of those who > are far > astray. We find some men desiring liberty, and priding themselves therein. > Such men > are in the depths of ignorance. > Liberty must, in the end, lead to sedition, whose flames none can > quench. Thus warneth > you He who is the Reckoner, the All-Knowing. Know ye that the embodiment of > liberty is the > symbol of the animal. That which beseemeth man is submission unto such > restraints as will > protect him from his own ignorance, and guard him against the harm of the > mischief-maker. > Liberty causeth man to overstep the bounds of propriety, and to infringe on > the dignity of his > station. It debaseth him to the level of extreme depravity and wickedness. > Regard men as a flock of sheep that need a shepherd for their > protection. This, verily, is the > truth, the certain truth. We approve of liberty in certain circumstances, > and refuse to sanction > it in others. We, verily, are the All-Knowing." > > > Do people agree about the similiarity of the two notions? And if so, what > does that mean about the essential Baha'i understanding of 'Liberty,' and > its corrolaries 'Freedom' and 'Democracy'? Both of these two quotes in their > literal meaning seem to be against the classical utilitarian definition of > 'Liberty' as well as the libertarian one. From these quotes, what can people > glean about the limits that religious understanding seems to want to place > upon individual and political liberty? Does the negative position on > 'Liberty' derive in part from notions of sovereignty, i.e. God vs the > Popular Will, etc? > > > -- > Freethought110 > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 5:52 PM Subject: John Winthrop - NOT Mather - Re: Christian Puritan Notions of 'Liberty' and Baha'u'llah's Notion of 'Liberty' [Thanks to Nima Hazini for bringing this passage to my attention.) Mather is in turn quoting John Winthrop: "Concerning liberty, I observe a great mistake in the country about that. There is a twofold liberty, natural (I mean as our nature is now corrupt) and civil or federal. The first is common to man with beast and other creatures. By this, man, as he stands in relation to man simply, hath liberty to do what he lists; it is a liberty to evil as well as to good. This liberty is compatible and inconsistent with authority, and cannot endure the least restraint of the most just authority. The exercise and maintaining of this liberty makes men grow more evil, and in time to be worse than brute beasts: Omnes Sumus Licentia Deteriores. This is that great enemy of truth and peace, that wild beast, which all the ordinances of God are bent against, to restrain and subdue it. The other kind of liberty I call civil or federal; it may also be termed moral, in reference to the covenant between God and man, in the moral law, and the politic covenants and constitutions, among men themselves. This liberty is the proper end and object of authority, and cannot subsist without it; and it is a liberty to that only which is good, just, and honest. This liberty you are to stand for, with hazard not only of your goods, but of your lives, if need be. Whatsover crosseth this, is not authority, but a distemper thereof. This liberty is maintained and exercised in a way of subjection to authority; it is of the same kind of liberty wherewith Christ hath make us free." Quoted from my own copy of De Toqueville, Editor Phillips Bradley, 9th printing, 1961, 44-45. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Mather.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 9:37 AM Subject: Re: Christian Puritan Notions of 'Liberty' and Baha'u'llah's Notion of 'Liberty' "Freethought110" wrote in message news:a7jb2s$20c1$1@austar-news.austar.net.au... > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:a7iupb$lis18$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > both sound the classical notes > > that enlighten intelligent reflection on Liberty throughout human > > experience.... > > I disagree. Mather's distinction is actually against a postive definition of > Liberty as one would find it in Enlightenment philosophes or later on with > JS Mill, et al. It seems that as primarily religious persons Mather and > Baha'u'llah wish to predicate Liberty upon divine will and the duty to such > divine will. As an agnostic, such premises are obviously objectionable (and > illogical) to me since implicit in the argument is that Liberty without duty > to God does not exist whereas with Rousseau, Voltaire and later with Kant, > Mill and others "God" is irrelevant to the discussions of 'human' liberty, > and in fact a counter-intuitive argument. I would say Winthrop (not Mather, it should be noted) allows for liberty in both senses, i.e., Rousseau et al have confused license with liberty, producing modernity, in a sense. In Rousseau's case, as has been said, he needed to justify his own depravity. I part ways with the Enlightenment philosophes and do not revere them without serious qualification. The importance of the source being Winthrop cannot be overstated. Baha'u'llah's distinction between liberty and license resonates with classical thinking grounded in transcendence which I believe is necessary for most people. While some secular thinkers can achieve virtuous liberty, I do not believe overall that it can be maintained without a religious ethic, a truth now demonstrated in many societies around the globe, i.e., the modern problem. I respect and understand your views, Nima, but don't share them. I am a Baha'i because I do believe in Baha'u'llah's Revelation of the Will of God for this age and time, providing the right mix of old and new for the conditions of the day, though hamstrung, by the literal-minded, a very old story, rife with the antinomies that stir up the soul.... God is essential to understanding liberty, I would argue, and modern experience proves it in abundantly appalling ways. > > Hope you don't mind my adding Mather to Penn, for my own > > delectation, if no one else's. > > Not at all. Thanks again for sharing a marvelous quotation with us. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 7:17 AM To: cmurr@snet.net Subject: Re: Robert Hayden Dear Ms. Murray: The quotation comes from a letter wrote to me in 1979 or 1980. A copy should exist at the Baha'i archives in Wilmette. I'm pleased to hear of your interest in Hayden. His work has been grossly underappreciated and studied in my view. I wish you well in your work and hope you can help remedied those shortcomings. Thank you for your good words on my editing his prose and poems. There were many difficult editorial decisions that had to be made on both books that perhaps only someone like yourself who has studied the variants and sources can begin to understand. My overriding purpose was to create readable texts that would help his reputation to continue to grow, not repositories of every scrap, something Bob and I had often discussed. It is my experience that the complexity of his work is very far beyond the various current levels of understanding within Baha'i circles. If you're unfamiliar with it, my essay "Recentering" on Hayden may be found on my website at https://fglaysher.com/Recentering.htm Best wishes, Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com FG@hotmail.com >From: Caroline Murray >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Robert Hayden >Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:56:56 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [204.60.203.69] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE67882200A140042A22CC3CCB45CC0F0; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:54:59 -0800 >Received: from spunky (204.135.252.64.snet.net [64.252.135.204])by mta3.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-smtp-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with SMTP id g2OKrwgp005687for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:53:58 -0500 (EST) >From cmurr@snet.net Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:56:11 -0800 >Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020324155656.00794a50@pop.snet.net> >X-Sender: cmurr@pop.snet.net (Unverified) >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) > >Dear Mr. Glaysher: > >Today I discovered your website and noticed a Robert Hayden quote praising >you: "A poet now whose work and dedication to a demanding and difficult art >I admire; a man who has the gift of inner grace." > >Please tell me (1) the souce of this quote and (2) how I can obtain a copy, >if that is appropriate. > >For the past three years I've been compiling a series of study guides for >Hayden's poems. I expect to spend at least another three years working on >this project. > >Whether these guides will ever be published remains to be seen. At this >point I'm just field-testing them with fellow Baha'is at firesides and at >Sunday School. I've also had the good fortune to be invited to expand this >field-testing process by facilitating an annual informal "course" at a >University of Connecticut non-credit program called CLIR (Center for >Learning In Retirement). > >I'm sending you this request because I'd like to collect copies of >everything I can find that Hayden wrote including every publication of his >works. I'm also collecting copies of any criticism, as well as any other >mention, of his writings. I haven't counted recently but I think that I've >accumulated over 400 such copies. > >I certainly admire the fine job you did editing Hayden's poems and prose. >In fact, I'm making extensive use of both books you edited. Because I >haven't made any plans as yet to publish and, at this point, I only share >them with the field-testing participants free of any charge, I haven't >sought any copyright permissions. I'm told this is done by the publisher. >I certainly hope I understand this correctly! > >I look forward to hearing from you regarding the above quote. Thank you >very much. > >Sincerely, > >Caroline Murray >63 Pinnacle Road >Ellington, CT 06029 >(860) 872-0705 ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: ATTN - American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal - "Enemies Within - Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" by Karen Bacquet I highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, to anyone interested in the bahai faith, as perhaps the best introduction to the many conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during the last few decades: "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---- "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 3:09 PM Subject: Re: General question about Fred G. and the like... The Bahai Technique - Ad Hominem, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Discredit, Smear, Shun, Revile, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball, Coerce, Silence, Harass... etc., etc.... ------------------------------------------------------------------ During the last decade or two a number of observers have noted common methods many fundamentalist Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB [Covenant Breaker (heretic)] to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket. Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole10.htm Professor Juan Cole, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all). Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'isor when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith. The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent. With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them. This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute. Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole71.htm Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [since 1976]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." https://fglaysher.com/LettersAmD1989-1994.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular.Very sad." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/House2.htm Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a groupacts this way. Very scary." Dermod Ryder, September 19, 2001: "And then Eureka! I realised why Fred gets the treatment he does . . . for Fred has painstakingly not only assembled the evidence of the canker within but he constantly publicises it to the extent that he really gets up noses and AO noses at that! . . . I basically agree with him that the AO terrorises people - terror is more than bombs or kamikaze aircraft. A whispered aside in the right circumstances can instil terror (like a threat to be made a CB) - most ethnic cleansing is carried out by a piece of "good" advice to the effect that one would be better off NOT living in this neighbourhood, from a gentleman who is known or assumed to have the "right connections" to ensure the advice is heeded. Twenty years ago the AO tried that particular threatening tactic on with me and were told where they could stick it! Others can also testify to that including Dennis Rogers whose experiences were posted on TRB recently. And you guys hate Fred for this, for his continued exposing of the sewer that the AO has become. Of course you all hate Juan, Alison, Michael, Nima etc as well and for the same reason and give them the same treatment but somewhat reduced for they don't post as much as Fred who is just a real pain in the butt for doing what he does so well! Fred is an avid counter terrorist and he's good at it as the whimpering from the BIGS proves!" https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Ryder2001.htm Dermod Ryder, February 28, 2002: "This is what is known as the "love bomb" technique. Disregard and entirely ignore the substance of any complaint or criticism and throw out this carpet of "bahai love" which will overwhelm the reason and appeal to the emotion. I've been vaccinated! What I also glean from recourse to this technique is that there is no answer to the points I raised. In effect you guys who support the AO do so through thick and thin to the point where you cannot and will not admit that it has any faults of any substantive value. Because guys like me cannot agree with you - the fault is obviously ours." K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Johnson18.htm Mr Mahdi, November 14, 2000: "The extremism of those who are trying to get Fred Glaysher off the Internet is beyond any rational justification, for the simple fact that Fred does not use any lewd or obscene language nor does he post irrelevant topics that are not worthy of discussion. Bahais seem to be so obsessed at maintaining their superficial "progressive" image that anything that exposes the . . . hypocrisy of the bahai faith are suppressed and attacked, in order for the bahais to keep deceiving people into thinking that these are unwarranted and baseless attacks and accusations which hold no weight in reality." Gibro28W, October 12, 1998:"In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place."https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb73.htm Steven Scholl, March 12, 2002: "The problem in her [Susan Maneck] cult view of the world is the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal Baha'i affairs so that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place in the Baha'i world. The great sin is ignoring the Baha'i taboo against speaking out against internal injustices because to do so is to tarnish the reputation of the Baha'i institutions. Good Baha'is are expected to take their abuse in silence. If they speak out against abuse, they are regarded as internal opposition and come under investigation from the Baha'i Inquisition. They are villified and threatened, even told that their status in the afterlife is threatened if they don't change their ways. And, yes, this was a key element [in] the little drama that played out between the Baha'i leadership and myself." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl4.htm David Langness, 31 Mar 1997: "I would advise you to be careful about any meetings, calls or correspondence with Hoda Mahmoudi, who used to be an ABM here in Southern California. She is quite conservative, and sees herself -- as do many of the appointed branch, sadly -- as a staunch defender of the Faith and the faithful, able and more than willing to marginalize people like you and I to discredit our ideas. This cultlike practice of shunning and casting out any dissidents has unfortunately become the chief tactic of those fundamentalist Baha'is bent on maintaining the current leadership. My worry is that the more progressive Baha'is like Juan Cole and Steve Scholl and yourself will all leave the Faith and thereby increase the power of the conservatives." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- LaAeterna on the fundamentalist silencing of opponents: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb65.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: Maneck/Scholl correspondence "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$meywtg$ezc$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > I was planning to go with certain information and a copy of the Sobhani and > Akhtar-Khavari files to the US Department of Justice and have them initiate > investigations on possible charges of embezzlement and corruption (and maybe > even tax evasion) against the us nsa. John Walbridge had a caniption, thus > the majnun post. > > In hindsight I definitely should have. If you do have "certain information" along the lines you claim above, I would think the right thing to do would be to bring it to the attention of the US Department of Justice and let it decide whether any laws have been broken. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 7:02 AM Subject: OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 7:03 AM Subject: Re: OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." Further details in "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Nima Hazini[SMTP:nimah110@onthenet.com.au] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:33 AM To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com Subject: links Dear Fred, A few of the links on the main page don't work properly from time to time, esp. Voices of Conscience - Dermod & Baha'i Fundamentalism Defined. cheers, Nima ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:55 PM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:qTkr8.2058$7F1.1658@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... > Paul Hammond wrote in message > news:3cad7f8e@212.67.96.135... > > Rather, I thought it was > > to allow the expression of *all* types of political opinion, and > > prevent any kind of electoral dictatorship (in the American > > context, avoiding the President acting like a King was a > > major concern). > Some measure > of check and balance to rein in the Henotheists by making sure they rely on > the writings rather than their own "infallible guidance" is necessary. > James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, makes it clear that checks and balances will not prevent corruption but will lead to a sufficient stalemate so that leaders of good will and public opinion will have a greater chance of correcting the threat to social stability: The regular distribution of power into distinct departments; the introduction of legislative balances and checks; the institution of courts composed of judges holding their offices during good behavior; the representation of the people in the legislature by deputies of their own election: these are wholly new discoveries, or have made their principal progress towards perfection in modern times. They are means, and powerful means, by which the excellences of republican government may be retained and its imperfections lessened or avoided. The Federalist Papers : No. 9 https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed09.htm I agree with Randy that a real system of checks and balances is necessary to reign in the fundamentalists who now control Baha'u'llah's Faith. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:13 PM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" An interesting excerpt from The Constitution of Virginia; June 29, 1776 (1) Bill of Rights; June 12, 1776: https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/va05.htm SEC. 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:a8l6i1$t80u1$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > "Randy Burns" wrote in message > news:qTkr8.2058$7F1.1658@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... > > Paul Hammond wrote in message > > news:3cad7f8e@212.67.96.135... > > > > Rather, I thought it was > > > to allow the expression of *all* types of political opinion, and > > > prevent any kind of electoral dictatorship (in the American > > > context, avoiding the President acting like a King was a > > > major concern). > > > Some measure > > of check and balance to rein in the Henotheists by making sure they rely > on > > the writings rather than their own "infallible guidance" is necessary. > > > > James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, makes it clear that > checks and balances will not prevent corruption but will lead > to a sufficient stalemate so that leaders of good will and public > opinion will have a greater chance of correcting the threat to > social stability: > > The regular distribution of power into distinct departments; the > introduction of legislative balances and checks; the institution of courts > composed of judges holding their offices during good behavior; the > representation of the people in the legislature by deputies of their own > election: these are wholly new discoveries, or have made their principal > progress towards perfection in modern times. They are means, and powerful > means, by which the excellences of republican government may be retained and > its imperfections lessened or avoided. The Federalist Papers : No. 9 > https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed09.htm > > I agree with Randy that a real system of checks and balances is necessary > to reign in the fundamentalists who now control Baha'u'llah's Faith. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:23 PM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" If memory serves, Jefferson was the central author of the Virginia Bill of Rights: https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/va05.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:a8l7ju$tct1c$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > An interesting excerpt from The Constitution of Virginia; June 29, 1776 (1) > Bill of Rights; June 12, 1776: > https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/va05.htm > > SEC. 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the > manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not > by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free > exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:a8l6i1$t80u1$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > "Randy Burns" wrote in message > > news:qTkr8.2058$7F1.1658@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... > > > Paul Hammond wrote in message > > > news:3cad7f8e@212.67.96.135... > > > > > > Rather, I thought it was > > > > to allow the expression of *all* types of political opinion, and > > > > prevent any kind of electoral dictatorship (in the American > > > > context, avoiding the President acting like a King was a > > > > major concern). > > > > > Some measure > > > of check and balance to rein in the Henotheists by making sure they rely > > on > > > the writings rather than their own "infallible guidance" is necessary. > > > > > > > James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, makes it clear that > > checks and balances will not prevent corruption but will lead > > to a sufficient stalemate so that leaders of good will and public > > opinion will have a greater chance of correcting the threat to > > social stability: > > > > The regular distribution of power into distinct departments; the > > introduction of legislative balances and checks; the institution of courts > > composed of judges holding their offices during good behavior; the > > representation of the people in the legislature by deputies of their own > > election: these are wholly new discoveries, or have made their principal > > progress towards perfection in modern times. They are means, and powerful > > means, by which the excellences of republican government may be retained > and > > its imperfections lessened or avoided. The Federalist Papers : No. 9 > > https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed09.htm > > > > I agree with Randy that a real system of checks and balances is necessary > > to reign in the fundamentalists who now control Baha'u'llah's Faith. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 8:45 AM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" The Constitutions can be found at https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/statech.htm I've never read James Kent's Commentaries. My interests are mainly literary and history, not legal. Thanks, though, for bringing him to our attention. Might be something I ought to dip around in. FULL TEXT is online at https://www.constitution.org/jk/jk_000.htm Encyclopedia.com states: 1763-1847, American jurist, b. near Brewster, N.Y. He was admitted to the bar in 1785 and began practice in Poughkeepsie, N. Y. Active in the Federalist party, he served several terms in the New York legislature. In 1793, Kent moved to New York City, where his reputation for learning established him as first professor of law at Columbia College. His lectures (1794-98) were not especially well received, and he welcomed the appointment in 1798 as a judge of the state supreme court. He was made chief judge in 1804, and from 1814 until his statutory retirement in 1823 he presided over the state court of chancery. Kent's written opinions as chancellor were instrumental in reviving equity , which had largely lapsed in the United States after the American Revolution. He refashioned many of the doctrines in that area by combining concepts from English chancery jurisprudence with the principles of Roman law. After his retirement he again (1824-26) was professor of law at Columbia, but found the delivery of lectures tedious and soon resigned. He vastly expanded the material of his courses to prepare his Commentaries on American Law(4 vol., 1826-30), a systematic treatment of international law, American constitutional law, the sources of state law, and the law of personal rights and of property. It was enthusiastically received by the legal profession and in Kent's lifetime went through six editions. Bibliography: See Memoirs and Letters of James Kent by his great-grandson, William Kent (1898, repr. 1970); study by J. T. Horton (1939, repr. 1969). -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$0wh4ug$1zj$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Fred, > > Do you know of or have access to the following work which apparently > discusses the various Constitutions of the original 13 colonies in great > depth including an extensive commentary on the Federalist papers? De > Tocqueville quotes from it throughout *Democracy in America*, > > James Kent. Commentaries on American Law published between 1826-30. > > -- > Freethought110 > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 9:16 AM Subject: Re: Bahai extremism on AOL's bahai message board Thanks for saying so. Let's hope, in the long run, AOL will wake up to what it's allowing to take place on the bahai message boards. Any chance you could share this with people on AOL in General Discussion, AOL Legal Department thread? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mr Mahdi" wrote in message news:20020406022414.01912.00002335@mb-df.aol.com... > For years I have complained about the extremist elements from amongst the bahai > faith who happen to take control as "forum leaders" and "moderators" of the > bahai message board on AOL. When I mention that I know people that not only > had their accounts terminated not once but two or three times due to bahai > extremists' manipulation of AOL's TOS and deceiving AOL staff, many of them > think I am lying or exageration. They think so because it would never cross > the people's mind for a moment that a forum on an ISP will be playground for a > ultra-extremist and intolerant agenda of a group of people trying to promote > their world view and harrass those who do not agree or toe their line. > > For years, people have lost their accounts, been harrassed and slandered by the > ultra-fanatical elements from amongst the bahais on AOL. I have never > witnessed in any other forum on AOL where two successive moderators/forum > leaders with the SAME intolerant extremist agenda controlled it with an iron > fist, censoring non bahais and bahais who are not dogmatic extremists. I have > never heard on ANY AOL forum where many people who did not toe a certain line > had their accounts terminated or at least suspended because the forum leaders > and other bahais have reported them to AOL. Fred Glaysher's website shows us > extensive evidence of years of bahai extremist manipulation and outright > double-standards. > > I am confused as to why AOL has allowed this to go on and on and on and on and > on for so many years, despite the fact that several AOL members have complained > and even documented the abuse of the bahai extremist forum leaders/moderators. > > > I would like for AOL to offer an explanation as to why they have allowed this > to go on for so long. It is either they don't know or don't care. I hope that > it is the former because if it is, we can inform them (once again) as to what > goes on so they can take action. > > From a concerned member of AOL, > > Mahdi Muhammad > > https://brothermahdi.tripod.com/index.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 8:55 AM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" A recent book you might find interesting for its discussion of constitutional order, liberty, and religion: On Two Wings: Humble Faith and Common Sense at the American Founding -- by Michael Novak 2001. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$jfa6ug$43l$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Thanks for that, Fred. Let us say I am dipping my hands in English and > American constitutional history ;-) Fascinating area.... > > -- > Freethought110 > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:a8mu6s$tko4r$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > The Constitutions can be found at > > https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/statech.htm > > > > I've never read James Kent's Commentaries. My interests > > are mainly literary and history, not legal. Thanks, though, > > for bringing him to our attention. Might be something I > > ought to dip around in. FULL TEXT is online at > > https://www.constitution.org/jk/jk_000.htm > > > > Encyclopedia.com states: > > 1763-1847, American jurist, b. near Brewster, N.Y. He was admitted to the > > bar in 1785 and began practice in Poughkeepsie, N. Y. Active in the > > Federalist party, he served several terms in the New York legislature. In > > 1793, Kent moved to New York City, where his reputation for learning > > established him as first professor of law at Columbia College. His > lectures > > (1794-98) were not especially well received, and he welcomed the > appointment > > in 1798 as a judge of the state supreme court. He was made chief judge in > > 1804, and from 1814 until his statutory retirement in 1823 he presided > over > > the state court of chancery. Kent's written opinions as chancellor were > > instrumental in reviving equity , which had largely lapsed in the United > > States after the American Revolution. He refashioned many of the doctrines > > in that area by combining concepts from English chancery jurisprudence > with > > the principles of Roman law. After his retirement he again (1824-26) was > > professor of law at Columbia, but found the delivery of lectures tedious > and > > soon resigned. He vastly expanded the material of his courses to prepare > his > > Commentaries on American Law(4 vol., 1826-30), a systematic treatment of > > international law, American constitutional law, the sources of state law, > > and the law of personal rights and of property. It was enthusiastically > > received by the legal profession and in Kent's lifetime went through six > > editions. > > > > Bibliography: See Memoirs and Letters of James Kent by his great-grandson, > > William Kent (1898, repr. 1970); study by J. T. Horton (1939, repr. 1969). > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > news:newscache$0wh4ug$1zj$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > Fred, > > > > > > Do you know of or have access to the following work which apparently > > > discusses the various Constitutions of the original 13 colonies in great > > > depth including an extensive commentary on the Federalist papers? De > > > Tocqueville quotes from it throughout *Democracy in America*, > > > > > > James Kent. Commentaries on American Law published between 1826-30. > > > > > > -- > > > Freethought110 > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 8:57 AM Subject: Socrates on the Unexamined bahai Life Not worth living.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 11:04 AM Subject: Psalm 35 Psalm 35 [1] Plead my cause, O LORD, with them that strive with me: fight against them that fight against me. [2] Take hold of shield and buckler, and stand up for mine help. [3] Draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me: say unto my soul, I am thy salvation. [4] Let them be confounded and put to shame that seek after my soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt. [5] Let them be as chaff before the wind: and let the angel of the LORD chase them. [6] Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the LORD persecute them. [7] For without cause have they hid for me their net in a pit, which without cause they have digged for my soul. [8] Let destruction come upon him at unawares; and let his net that he hath hid catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall. [9] And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation. [10] All my bones shall say, LORD, who is like unto thee, which deliverest the poor from him that is too strong for him, yea, the poor and the needy from him that spoileth him? [11] False witnesses did rise up; they laid to my charge things that I knew not. [12] They rewarded me evil for good to the spoiling of my soul. [13] But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth: I humbled my soul with fasting; and my prayer returned into mine own bosom. [14] I behaved myself as though he had been my friend or brother: I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother. [15] But in mine adversity they rejoiced, and gathered themselves together: yea, the abjects gathered themselves together against me, and I knew it not; they did tear me, and ceased not: [16] With hypocritical mockers in feasts, they gnashed upon me with their teeth. [17] Lord, how long wilt thou look on? rescue my soul from their destructions, my darling from the lions. [18] I will give thee thanks in the great congregation: I will praise thee among much people. [19] Let not them that are mine enemies wrongfully rejoice over me: neither let them wink with the eye that hate me without a cause. [20] For they speak not peace: but they devise deceitful matters against them that are quiet in the land. [21] Yea, they opened their mouth wide against me, and said, Aha, aha, our eye hath seen it. [22] This thou hast seen, O LORD: keep not silence: O Lord, be not far from me. [23] Stir up thyself, and awake to my judgment, even unto my cause, my God and my Lord. [24] Judge me, O LORD my God, according to thy righteousness; and let them not rejoice over me. [25] Let them not say in their hearts, Ah, so would we have it: let them not say, We have swallowed him up. [26] Let them be ashamed and brought to confusion together that rejoice at mine hurt: let them be clothed with shame and dishonour that magnify themselves against me. [27] Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let the LORD be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant. [28] And my tongue shall speak of thy righteousness and of thy praise all the day long. https://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=2190116 -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Re: Textual Analysis of "the Letter" Nima, It occurs to me that perhaps I should mention Russell Kirk's The Roots of American Order for an excellent reading of both the secular and religious background to American republican government. He has some superb chapters on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, a fellow Michigan citizen whom I've always admired. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:a8pj74$u90tl$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > A recent book you might find interesting for its > discussion of constitutional order, liberty, and religion: > > On Two Wings: Humble Faith and Common Sense > at the American Founding -- by Michael Novak 2001. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > news:newscache$jfa6ug$43l$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > Thanks for that, Fred. Let us say I am dipping my hands in English and > > American constitutional history ;-) Fascinating area.... > > > > -- > > Freethought110 > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > news:a8mu6s$tko4r$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > The Constitutions can be found at > > > https://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/states/statech.htm > > > > > > I've never read James Kent's Commentaries. My interests > > > are mainly literary and history, not legal. Thanks, though, > > > for bringing him to our attention. Might be something I > > > ought to dip around in. FULL TEXT is online at > > > https://www.constitution.org/jk/jk_000.htm > > > > > > Encyclopedia.com states: > > > 1763-1847, American jurist, b. near Brewster, N.Y. He was admitted to > the > > > bar in 1785 and began practice in Poughkeepsie, N. Y. Active in the > > > Federalist party, he served several terms in the New York legislature. > In > > > 1793, Kent moved to New York City, where his reputation for learning > > > established him as first professor of law at Columbia College. His > > lectures > > > (1794-98) were not especially well received, and he welcomed the > > appointment > > > in 1798 as a judge of the state supreme court. He was made chief judge > in > > > 1804, and from 1814 until his statutory retirement in 1823 he presided > > over > > > the state court of chancery. Kent's written opinions as chancellor were > > > instrumental in reviving equity , which had largely lapsed in the United > > > States after the American Revolution. He refashioned many of the > doctrines > > > in that area by combining concepts from English chancery jurisprudence > > with > > > the principles of Roman law. After his retirement he again (1824-26) was > > > professor of law at Columbia, but found the delivery of lectures tedious > > and > > > soon resigned. He vastly expanded the material of his courses to prepare > > his > > > Commentaries on American Law(4 vol., 1826-30), a systematic treatment of > > > international law, American constitutional law, the sources of state > law, > > > and the law of personal rights and of property. It was enthusiastically > > > received by the legal profession and in Kent's lifetime went through six > > > editions. > > > > > > Bibliography: See Memoirs and Letters of James Kent by his > great-grandson, > > > William Kent (1898, repr. 1970); study by J. T. Horton (1939, repr. > 1969). > > > > > > -- > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > > news:newscache$0wh4ug$1zj$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > > Fred, > > > > > > > > Do you know of or have access to the following work which apparently > > > > discusses the various Constitutions of the original 13 colonies in > great > > > > depth including an extensive commentary on the Federalist papers? De > > > > Tocqueville quotes from it throughout *Democracy in America*, > > > > > > > > James Kent. Commentaries on American Law published between 1826-30. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Freethought110 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:05 AM Subject: AOL - The problem on these bahai messages boards is not with AOL guidelines but the FYI Subj: Board Posting at Keyword: Spirituality Date: 4/7/2002 3:06:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: LDRS LFST Shahid To: Fglaysh12002 CC: LDRS LFST Mgr Dear Member, Regarding your message posted at Keyword: Baha'i>General Discussion>Re:Disagreements with AOL guidelines In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community has certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review Keyword: Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: Lifestyles Board Standards for information on what is appropriate in our community. Based on these standards and guidelines, your post was removed to avoid disruption to the message board discussion. Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review. We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you. If you have any questions or comments, please forward them to LDRS LFST Mgr. Regards, LDRS LFST Shahid Volunteer Message Board Leader AOL Lifestyles Community ======== Copy of Your Message ======== Subject: Re: Disagreements with AOL guidelines Date: 4/6/02 11:19 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Fglaysh12002 Message-id: <20020406111940.10643.00003266@mb-fo.aol.com> The problem on these bahai messages boards is not with AOL guidelines but the unfair, unjust, and aribitrary manner in which they are abused by those in whom AOL has misplaced its trust. Frederick Glaysher www.google.com Search Engine: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:30 AM Subject: AOL - AOL Legal Department's Address and many messages suppressed and deleted by Maneck on AOL AOL Legal Department's Address and many messages suppressed and deleted by Maneck on AOL https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL2002.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:46 AM Subject: ATTN - AOL - 1998 Message Remains All the More True Today..... From: Barthaman@aol.com To: RBCFAdmin@aol.com Cc: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: Re: Unpopular voices getting equal time.... Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 4:03 PM RBCF Administration (Jerry White): I just wanted to add my voice to Frederick Glaysher's in the appeal for more tolerance of pluralism (opposing, or dissenting viewpoints) in Baha'i Forums. The substance of what Mr. Glaysher says is absolutely true--I've observed the problem myself for a number of years. Even the most carefully worded, tactful style would be found objectionable by conservative Baha'is in this context--because there are sacred cows in the Baha'i religion, as in other religions, that remain off-limits for questioning. Those who persist in questioning are soon perceived as a mortal threat to the flock of "true believers." Baha'i critics, naturally, are never welcome in "their" forums. Critics like Glaysher (or myself) are immediately singled out for exclusion. We feel our views are just as valid and informative as the messages of the orthodox camp. Sure, we need not be strident, but what justification is there to shield the "true believers" from opposing, responsible views--the same views they will ultimately face in the real world anyway? Counter attacks by the Baha'is on Glaysher (and others) are to be expected. They'll call him anything--"anti-Baha'i," "covenant-breaker"--to dismiss his credibility and weaken his influence. Certainly, in the regard, the Baha'is are anti-democracy--a contradiction in terms of what the internet is all about. So, what is my point? It's that Baha'i forums should be required to make concessions like any other intellectually honest forums, allowing a fair share of unpopular views to contrast what has so far been propagandistic drival and authoritarian muscle-flexing. Glaysher and I believe that the Baha'i Faith is a world-class religion worth a whole lot more than that. We believe that fundamentalist mentalities--believers from Christian and Islamic backgrounds--have usurped all of the mainstream public forums now available to Baha'is--within and without their religious community. In light of the above, please reconsider (if there is room left to do so) Mr. Glaysher's appeals. He does speak for a number of others in this regard. Thanks for "listening." --Barthaman https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL12.htm See also the main AOL menu on my website: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:58 AM To: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: ATTN - AOL - 1998 Message Remains All the More True Today..... From: Barthaman@aol.com To: RBCFAdmin@aol.com Cc: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: Re: Unpopular voices getting equal time.... Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 4:03 PM RBCF Administration (Jerry White): I just wanted to add my voice to Frederick Glaysher's in the appeal for more tolerance of pluralism (opposing, or dissenting viewpoints) in Baha'i Forums. The substance of what Mr. Glaysher says is absolutely true--I've observed the problem myself for a number of years. Even the most carefully worded, tactful style would be found objectionable by conservative Baha'is in this context--because there are sacred cows in the Baha'i religion, as in other religions, that remain off-limits for questioning. Those who persist in questioning are soon perceived as a mortal threat to the flock of "true believers." Baha'i critics, naturally, are never welcome in "their" forums. Critics like Glaysher (or myself) are immediately singled out for exclusion. We feel our views are just as valid and informative as the messages of the orthodox camp. Sure, we need not be strident, but what justification is there to shield the "true believers" from opposing, responsible views--the same views they will ultimately face in the real world anyway? Counter attacks by the Baha'is on Glaysher (and others) are to be expected. They'll call him anything--"anti-Baha'i," "covenant-breaker"--to dismiss his credibility and weaken his influence. Certainly, in the regard, the Baha'is are anti-democracy--a contradiction in terms of what the internet is all about. So, what is my point? It's that Baha'i forums should be required to make concessions like any other intellectually honest forums, allowing a fair share of unpopular views to contrast what has so far been propagandistic drival and authoritarian muscle-flexing. Glaysher and I believe that the Baha'i Faith is a world-class religion worth a whole lot more than that. We believe that fundamentalist mentalities--believers from Christian and Islamic backgrounds--have usurped all of the mainstream public forums now available to Baha'is--within and without their religious community. In light of the above, please reconsider (if there is room left to do so) Mr. Glaysher's appeals. He does speak for a number of others in this regard. Thanks for "listening." --Barthaman https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL12.htm See also the main AOL menu on my website: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:16 AM To: cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Cc: community@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: > Baha'i Faith Challenge & Critique - BeliefNet ATTN - Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com I am patiently awaiting your response on behalf of BeliefNet. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship fglaysher 3/15/02 8:18 AM 1 out of 7 Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." ----------------------- I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published by Columbia University Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values (196)." The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... Essential Reading You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the technical moderating controls of discussion. With respect and best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship fglaysher 3/15/02 8:18 AM 2 out of 7 >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: FG@hotmail.com >CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 -0800 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >Message-id: >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , > >I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards. > >A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents >of >spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory >or derogatory remarks. The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you >agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts >that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and >spamming. It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet >members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if >you think their beliefs are false. > >We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >theboards. Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >messageboards and will be removed. We have no wish to silence >opposing viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom >of speech onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing >an idea (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we >will take action against poor behavior. > >To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of >your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express >your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about >other Beliefnet members. Probably the best thing is to focus on >ideas, rather than people. > >Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >https://www.beliefnet.com > ---------- From: Cheryl Fuller[SMTP:cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:45 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: > Baha'i Faith Challenge & Critique - BeliefNet There is nothing to respond to. You had some posts removed. I supported the actions of the hosts. Cheryl Fuller Assistant Community Producer Beliefnet.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl Fuller. On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 12:16 PM, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > ATTN - Cheryl Fuller >> Assistant Community Producer >> cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com > > I am patiently awaiting your response on behalf of BeliefNet. > > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > fglaysher > 3/15/02 8:18 AM 1 out of 7 > > Thank you for your message. As a member of the bahai faith since > 1976, I recommend you consider the recently published article of > Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i > Community" which appears in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research > center > and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study > psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and > professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a > cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a > growing > network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from > education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and > business." > > > ----------------------- > I also recommend you consider the testimony of Professor Juan Cole, of > the University of Michigan, Department of History, who surveys > the many incidents of bahai censorship that have taken place > during the last few decades in "The Baha'i Faith in America as > Panopticon, 1963-1997": > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > In Professor Juan Cole's book Modernity and the Millennium, published > by Columbia University > Press in 1998, Professor Cole observes the Baha'i administration has > increasingly come under the control of fundamentalists, "stressing > scriptural literalism . . . theocracy, censorship, intellectual > intolerance, > and denying key democratic values (196)." > > The issues involved in the Bahai Wars are indeed complex and > challenging. These sources will provide you with an historical view and > broad introduction. I mention two further especially noteworthy > articles by Steven Scholl, available on my website under > > Newcomers might want to start here or with Essential Readings: > > Steven Scholl - "Why I voluntarily left the religion" > The Bahai Technique Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... > etc.... Essential Reading > > You and BeliefNet are faced with a major challenge regarding free > speech and discussion, one that require considerable conscientious > effort on your parts if you are truly to understand the issues involved. > > Let me take this opportunity to mention that the new moderator who uses > the handle "World Citizen" appears to me and other participants to be a > bahai of fundamentalist mentality. The renaming of Question Bahais to > Dissenting Bahais reflects such an orientation, casting asperions on > all those individuals who would question anything, really, within a > bahai context. I believe it is a disservice to all honest and > thoughtful people, bahais and non-bahais, to allow such subtle > manipulations of the BeliefNet message boards and to permit basically > the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to gain control of the > technical moderating controls of discussion. > > With respect and best wishes, > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > fglaysher > 3/15/02 8:18 AM 2 out of 7 > >> From: Cheryl Fuller To: FG@hotmail.com >> CC: community@staff.beliefnet.com >> Subject: Your posts on the Baha'i boards >> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 23:25:10 -0500 >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >> MHotMailBE5AC2DB0011400437A218994002F1C05; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:18 >> -0800 >> Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net >> [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 >> (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id >> <0GSZ0081TYXOT7@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, >> 14 Mar 2002 23:25:01 -0500 (EST) >> From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:27:41 -0800 >> Message-id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) >> >> Dear Beliefnet member fglaysher , >> >> I am writing to you with concerns about your participation on >> Beliefnet's Baha'i message boards. >> >> A review of the messages you have posted reveals frequent incidents of >> spamming, posting the same message, usually containing inflammatory or >> derogatory remarks. The Beliefnet Rules of Conduct, to which you >> agreed when you registered as a member of Beliefnet, forbids posts >> that malign, vilify, defame, abuse, harass, or threaten others and >> spamming. It is not necessary for you to agree with other Beliefnet >> members, but we do insist that you treat them with courtesy, even if >> you think their beliefs are false. >> >> We also feel that the intent of some of your posts is to disrupt >> discussions and prevent others from enjoying and participating in >> theboards. Disruptive behavior is not acceptable on Beliefnet >> messageboards and will be removed. We have no wish to silence opposing >> viewpoints or controversy; we place great value on freedom of speech >> onBeliefnet. We will never censor someone for expressing an idea >> (withinthe limits of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct) but we will take >> action against poor behavior. >> >> To continue participating on Beliefnet, and to avoid a suspension of >> your membership privileges, we hope you will find a way to express >> your views that does not include disparaging personal remarks about >> other Beliefnet members. Probably the best thing is to focus on ideas, >> rather than people. >> >> Good luck and we look forward to hearing more from you on Beliefnet. >> >> Cheryl Fuller >> Assistant Community Producer >> cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com >> https://www.beliefnet.com >> > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: https://mobile.msn.com > ---------- From: community@staff.beliefnet.com[SMTP:community@staff.beliefnet.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:07 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Your posts in Baha'i C&C Dear Beliefnet member "fglaysher", Despite my earlier e-mail to you, I find that you are continuing to have difficulty getting along in the Beliefnet community. While we welcome your point of view, your behavior is a problem. I must ask you to refrain from making disparaging remarks to others on the basis of their beliefs, even if your opinion is religiously motivated. Secondly you continue to disrupt the Bahai C&C board on Beliefnet by attacking hosts and posting without permission private email sent to you. We recognize that you have strongly-held views. We support your right to express those views in appropriate ways on Beliefnet. If you want to express your views in the Bahai forum, please start a discussion thread, that does not consist wholly of reposted articles, usually containing inflammatory or derogatory remarks, or complaints. This is my second warning to you; a third warning will be accompanied by suspension of your Beliefnet membership privileges. I am hopeful that we can work this out without such drastic action. Cheryl Fuller Assistant Community Producer Beliefnet.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl Fuller. ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:44 AM To: community@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Re: Your posts in Baha'i C&C I believe there are many inaccurracies in your characterization of me and understanding of what is transpiring in the bahai message boards. You state: "posting without permission private email sent to you." That's false. What post do you refer to? You seem to be merely repeating fundamentalist slander from my fellow bahais. The host BeliefNet has been permitted to take over the bahai boards holds many fundamentalist views and has distorted discussion along his preferred lines of thought. You seem to be ignoring that fact, believed as such by many individuals other than myself. You are again repeating fundamentalist views and conceptions of what is taking place by stating I should "start new threads," respond to them, etc., when, in my view, they are the ones repeating the same old misrepresentations, slanders, ad hominems, against me, for instance, which doesn't seem to bother you nor the so-called host. Please explain why that is. In my view you are not honestly interested in the issues concerned and reveal a marked degree of bias and acceptance of fundamentalist thinking. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I suggest you read Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Thank you for responding though I neither accept nor agree with your interpretations, based on a lack of knowledge, in my generous view. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: community@staff.beliefnet.com >To: >Subject: Your posts in Baha'i C&C >Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0400 >Received: from [129.33.230.59] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE7DA29C0060400437658121E63B944F0; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:17:48 -0700 >Received: from cmn1web8.cmn1 (cmn1web8.cmn1 [10.2.2.18])by cmn1mx1.cmn1 (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23657;Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:10:50 -0400 >Received: from mail pickup service by cmn1web8.cmn1 with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:01 -0400 >From community@staff.beliefnet.com Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:19:00 -0700 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 >Message-ID: <02b3f0107150a42CMN1WEB8@cmn1web8.cmn1> > >Dear Beliefnet member "fglaysher", > >Despite my earlier e-mail to you, I find that you are continuing to have >difficulty getting along in the Beliefnet community. While we welcome your >point of view, your behavior is a problem. > >I must ask you to refrain from making disparaging remarks to others on the >basis of their beliefs, even if your opinion is religiously motivated. >Secondly you continue to disrupt the Bahai C&C board on Beliefnet by >attacking hosts and posting without permission private email sent to you. >We recognize that you have strongly-held views. We support your right to >express those views in appropriate ways on Beliefnet. If you want to >express your views in the Bahai forum, please start a discussion thread, >that does not consist wholly of reposted articles, usually containing >inflammatory or derogatory remarks, or complaints. > >This is my second warning to you; a third warning will be accompanied by >suspension of your Beliefnet membership privileges. I am hopeful that we >can work this out without such drastic action. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >Beliefnet.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, >confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of >this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, >is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl >Fuller. > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:44 AM To: community@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Re: Your posts in Baha'i C&C I believe there are many inaccurracies in your characterization of me and understanding of what is transpiring in the bahai message boards. You state: "posting without permission private email sent to you." That's false. What post do you refer to? You seem to be merely repeating fundamentalist slander from my fellow bahais. The host BeliefNet has been permitted to take over the bahai boards holds many fundamentalist views and has distorted discussion along his preferred lines of thought. You seem to be ignoring that fact, believed as such by many individuals other than myself. You are again repeating fundamentalist views and conceptions of what is taking place by stating I should "start new threads," respond to them, etc., when, in my view, they are the ones repeating the same old misrepresentations, slanders, ad hominems, against me, for instance, which doesn't seem to bother you nor the so-called host. Please explain why that is. In my view you are not honestly interested in the issues concerned and reveal a marked degree of bias and acceptance of fundamentalist thinking. As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I suggest you read Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Thank you for responding though I neither accept nor agree with your interpretations, based on a lack of knowledge, in my generous view. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: community@staff.beliefnet.com >To: >Subject: Your posts in Baha'i C&C >Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0400 >Received: from [129.33.230.59] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE7DA29C0060400437658121E63B944F0; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:17:48 -0700 >Received: from cmn1web8.cmn1 (cmn1web8.cmn1 [10.2.2.18])by cmn1mx1.cmn1 >(8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23657;Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:10:50 -0400 >Received: from mail pickup service by cmn1web8.cmn1 with Microsoft SMTPSVC; >Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:01 -0400 >From community@staff.beliefnet.com Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:19:00 -0700 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 >Message-ID: <02b3f0107150a42CMN1WEB8@cmn1web8.cmn1> > >Dear Beliefnet member "fglaysher", > >Despite my earlier e-mail to you, I find that you are continuing to have >difficulty getting along in the Beliefnet community. While we welcome your >point of view, your behavior is a problem. > >I must ask you to refrain from making disparaging remarks to others on the >basis of their beliefs, even if your opinion is religiously motivated. >Secondly you continue to disrupt the Bahai C&C board on Beliefnet by >attacking hosts and posting without permission private email sent to you. >We recognize that you have strongly-held views. We support your right to >express those views in appropriate ways on Beliefnet. If you want to >express your views in the Bahai forum, please start a discussion thread, >that does not consist wholly of reposted articles, usually containing >inflammatory or derogatory remarks, or complaints. > >This is my second warning to you; a third warning will be accompanied by >suspension of your Beliefnet membership privileges. I am hopeful that we >can work this out without such drastic action. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >Beliefnet.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, >confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of >this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, >is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl >Fuller. > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. https://www.hotmail.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:54 AM To: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: Your 1998 Message Barthaman, May I have your explicit permission to repost this? It's come to my attention lately as still as true as ever and I believe others can benefit from the perspective of lapsed time. Thanks. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship From: Barthaman@aol.com To: RBCFAdmin@aol.com Cc: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: Re: Unpopular voices getting equal time.... Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 4:03 PM RBCF Administration (Jerry White): I just wanted to add my voice to Frederick Glaysher's in the appeal for more tolerance of pluralism (opposing, or dissenting viewpoints) in Baha'i Forums. The substance of what Mr. Glaysher says is absolutely true--I've observed the problem myself for a number of years. Even the most carefully worded, tactful style would be found objectionable by conservative Baha'is in this context--because there are sacred cows in the Baha'i religion, as in other religions, that remain off-limits for questioning. Those who persist in questioning are soon perceived as a mortal threat to the flock of "true believers." Baha'i critics, naturally, are never welcome in "their" forums. Critics like Glaysher (or myself) are immediately singled out for exclusion. We feel our views are just as valid and informative as the messages of the orthodox camp. Sure, we need not be strident, but what justification is there to shield the "true believers" from opposing, responsible views--the same views they will ultimately face in the real world anyway? Counter attacks by the Baha'is on Glaysher (and others) are to be expected. They'll call him anything--"anti-Baha'i," "covenant-breaker"--to dismiss his credibility and weaken his influence. Certainly, in the regard, the Baha'is are anti-democracy--a contradiction in terms of what the internet is all about. So, what is my point? It's that Baha'i forums should be required to make concessions like any other intellectually honest forums, allowing a fair share of unpopular views to contrast what has so far been propagandistic drival and authoritarian muscle-flexing. Glaysher and I believe that the Baha'i Faith is a world-class religion worth a whole lot more than that. We believe that fundamentalist mentalities--believers from Christian and Islamic backgrounds--have usurped all of the mainstream public forums now available to Baha'is--within and without their religious community. In light of the above, please reconsider (if there is room left to do so) Mr. Glaysher's appeals. He does speak for a number of others in this regard. Thanks for "listening." --Barthaman https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL12.htm See also the main AOL menu on my website: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 6:16 AM Subject: Re: Fundamentalist symptoms "Freethought110" wrote in message news:de9e05b.0204101550.38d8f3e4@posting.google.com... > > Nope. I am just me. I do not belong to a "side". I am not a > > fundamentalist nor am I a liberal. I am just a Baha'i. > > Sorry to break it out to you, Dave, you are indeed a *fundamentalist* > in every sense of the word. > -- > Freethought110 To understand what lies behind fundamentalist facades here on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai, one might want to consider, as evidence, the following message, from the person above, who is "just a Baha'i": https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.google.com&output=gplain -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 6:33 AM Subject: bahai - Terrorism & OFF- ONline Stalking - bahai - Terrorism & OFF- ONline Stalking - bahai - Terrorism & OFF- ONline Stalking - After twenty-five years as a member of the bahai faith, I see *little* difference between the basic underlying fanaticism of the perpetrators of the WTC terrorist attack and the fundamentalism of the worst elements among my fellow bahais. I cite Dave Fiorito's intolerant, threatening, hateful post as further EVIDENCE, along with much of the documentation on my website. https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.google.com&output=gplain In my view, only the uhj can begin to remedy this situation by abolishing the censorship of "review" and ceasing to interpret out of existence of the moderate and liberal Teachings on free speech and conscience, thereby by setting a new direction and tone for the faith. I consider it my duty, as a bahai and otherwise, to inform my fellow believers and citizens of how grave matters truly stand within what purports to be Baha'u'llah's religion. Some of the evidence may be found at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/hate.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/CHarassment.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BahaiThreatsLawsuit.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BahaiAttacksonme.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Ex.htm See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 6:35 AM Subject: bahai - Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists bahai - Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists bahai - Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists Having observed the tactics of bahai fundamentalists for over twenty-five years, I've learnt a few things about the way they operate: 1. Always Slander, Demonize, Discredit, Shun, Ad Hominem, Smear, Scapegoat, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Silence, Harass, etc., etc., the individual.... All of which has become known as "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm 2. Lure into supposed discussion then cut the jugular. 3. Work together to create the perception for uninformed non-bahais that the individual in question is unbalanced, aberrant, "spamming," a liar, crazy, disgruntled, reprobate, etc.... 4. Change or ignore the subject by shifting to the past and arguing over who said what, when, where, how, etc.... As long as the uhj uses the "temporary measure" of "review," for over 80 years now, to suppress all free thought and discussion and encourages such unseemly tactics, attempting to discuss anything with them is simply a waste of time and energy. Many people other than myself have noted "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm Nobody has to read my reposts who has done so already. My Message Rules are full of bahai fundamentalists. Others may use the same technology to filter out my reposts. My reposts are intended for the uninformed and naive, exactly what enrages the extremists among my fellow bahais. Anyone interested in my views may read them in my archives or glean them from my reposts, which, in my view, preserve the historical record of how deceitful bahai fanatics have been and are willing to go.... I can only hope by serving humbly, as the self-appointed archivist/historian for talk.religion.bahai and for all the many victims of the "universal" house of "justice," that someday someone will come along who will dig deep enough into the record so that the truth will begin to surface. Impartial nonbahai observers might wish to compare and decide for themselves whether the picture fundamentalists labor so hard to paint of me is accurate or not: https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm And then ask yourself why would they go to such extremes? What is it they don't want you to know? I submit the answers may be found on my bahai website. It is my hope that the distortions of the uhj will begin to be purged, it will gradually reform itself, acknowledging the broad and liberal Teachings of Baha'u'llah that it has suppressed now for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Cheryl Fuller[SMTP:cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 1:29 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Your posts in Baha'i C&C You posted email from me to you. I did not give you permission to do so. This is not an issue of who hosts the boards. We have had member complaints about your habit reposting the same materials which simply has the effect of bringing your threads to the top of the list. There is no evidence that you intend discussion. I looked at the threads when I warned you about this before. I looked at them again. Cheryl Fuller Assistant Community Producer Beliefnet.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl Fuller. On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 04:44 PM, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > I believe there are many inaccurracies in your characterization of me > and understanding of what is transpiring in the bahai message boards. > > You state: > > "posting without permission private email sent to you." > > That's false. What post do you refer to? You seem to be merely > repeating fundamentalist slander from my fellow bahais. > > The host BeliefNet has been permitted to take over the bahai boards > holds many fundamentalist views and has distorted discussion along his > preferred lines of thought. You seem to be ignoring that fact, believed > as such by many individuals other than myself. > > You are again repeating fundamentalist views and conceptions of what is > taking place by stating I should "start new threads," respond to them, > etc., when, in my view, they are the ones repeating the same old > misrepresentations, slanders, ad hominems, against me, for instance, > which doesn't seem to bother you nor the so-called host. Please explain > why that is. > > In my view you are not honestly interested in the issues concerned and > reveal a marked degree of bias and acceptance of fundamentalist > thinking. > > As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I suggest you read Karen > Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic > Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's > message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i > Community" may be found on her website: > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > Thank you for responding though I neither accept nor agree with your > interpretations, based on a lack of knowledge, in my generous view. > > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > >> From: community@staff.beliefnet.com >> To: >> Subject: Your posts in Baha'i C&C >> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0400 >> Received: from [129.33.230.59] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >> MHotMailBE7DA29C0060400437658121E63B944F0; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:17:48 >> -0700 >> Received: from cmn1web8.cmn1 (cmn1web8.cmn1 [10.2.2.18])by >> cmn1mx1.cmn1 (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23657;Wed, 10 Apr 2002 >> 11:10:50 -0400 >> Received: from mail pickup service by cmn1web8.cmn1 with Microsoft >> SMTPSVC; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:01 -0400 >> From community@staff.beliefnet.com Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:19:00 -0700 >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 >> Message-ID: <02b3f0107150a42CMN1WEB8@cmn1web8.cmn1> >> >> Dear Beliefnet member "fglaysher", >> >> Despite my earlier e-mail to you, I find that you are continuing to >> have >> difficulty getting along in the Beliefnet community. While we welcome >> your >> point of view, your behavior is a problem. >> >> I must ask you to refrain from making disparaging remarks to others on >> the >> basis of their beliefs, even if your opinion is religiously motivated. >> Secondly you continue to disrupt the Bahai C&C board on Beliefnet by >> attacking hosts and posting without permission private email sent to >> you. >> We recognize that you have strongly-held views. We support your right >> to >> express those views in appropriate ways on Beliefnet. If you want to >> express your views in the Bahai forum, please start a discussion >> thread, >> that does not consist wholly of reposted articles, usually containing >> inflammatory or derogatory remarks, or complaints. >> >> This is my second warning to you; a third warning will be accompanied >> by >> suspension of your Beliefnet membership privileges. I am hopeful that >> we >> can work this out without such drastic action. >> >> Cheryl Fuller >> Assistant Community Producer >> Beliefnet.com >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, >> confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution of >> this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named above, >> is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl >> Fuller. >> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > https://www.hotmail.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: Re: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - "Alma Engels" wrote in message news:rkOt8.3961$3z3.356545@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... Lately I have been thinking that someone like Fred who is a > Baha'i but an individualistic one is here to test the rest of us Baha'is. > Can we accept him? And live in peace with him? If we can't with another > Baha'i, what makes us think that Baha'is are ready to accept and live with > peace with non-Baha'is. > > In peace, Alma, It's a pleasure to be understood. Two clarifications: I would say that all souls stand as individuals before God, and each and every one of us is a test to one another.... "When every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 4:50 PM Subject: Re: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - "Paul Hammond" wrote in message news:3cb831c1@212.67.96.135... > > Well, now, as to whether Fred is a Baha'i, or a baha'i, there's another > issues that has been flogged beyond death. > > AIUI, Fred definitely considers himself to be Baha'i - so he is as > Baha'i as my friend Karen, or Alison Marshall is. Please define AIUI. > But, since enquiries seem to have established that he is no longer > enrolled on the NSA's official list of Baha'is, he *isn't* a Baha'i, as > in "signed on to the AO's list Baha'i". Paul, The "enquiries" of liars and a slanderers have established nothing. The fact remains that neither the nsa nor the uhj has contacted me in any way whatsoever. You may choose to accept the false witness of slanderers; I do not. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 4:58 PM Subject: Re: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 8:59 AM Subject: Re: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - "Alma Engels" wrote in message news:Qx7u8.6078$3z3.580298@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > Fred -- posts are so brief and in addition I have 'slippery' fingers which > mistype and I correct. I didn't mean to imply that you are only a 'test.' > You are a person in your own rights and a follower of Baha'u'llah. But your > ways are not my ways just as the Haifan adherents (my how I work to avoid > labels they don't like) are not mine. And somehow we don't seem able to > bridge the gap with acceptance of each other just as the person is. Alma, Actually, while I may not agree with you, or any other human being about whatever in particular, I believe I do accept the right of others to think and say what they wish without fear of coercion and terror. "Soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 9:13 AM Subject: Re: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - Scapegoat https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scapegoat.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG@hotmail.com[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 6:24 AM To: cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Subject: Re: Your posts in Baha'i C&C I didn't ask you for permission to repost your message. It was clear to me that you are either woefully lacking in understanding of what is actually transpiring on the bahai BeliefNet message boards or a fundamentalist bahai yourself, as are the "hosts." I can understand that you would have wanted to suppress such facts. You and BeliefNet are being used by the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais: See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm If you're an honest "moderator," delete the NEWCOMERS - BEGIN HERE thread which is only full of fundamentalist slander and abuse of me, which apparently suits you and the "hosts" just fine. Further, I'm under no obligation to respond or discuss anything with liars and slanderers among my fellow bahais or otherwise. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: Cheryl Fuller >To: Frederick Glaysher >Subject: Re: Your posts in Baha'i C&C >Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:29:33 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [24.153.64.2] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE80725400A14004320D18994002F92864; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 11:30:06 -0700 >Received: from localhost (pcp01223126pcs.roylok01.mi.comcast.net [68.61.35.57]) by mtaout03.icomcast.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built Feb 6 2002)) with ESMTP id <0GUG007CZWP8SF@mtaout03.icomcast.net> for FG@hotmail.com; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:29:32 -0400 (EDT) >From cfuller@staff.beliefnet.com Fri, 12 Apr 2002 11:31:25 -0700 >In-reply-to: >Message-id: <3C428D86-4E43-11D6-A01C-0003933F95A6@staff.beliefnet.com> >X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) > >You posted email from me to you. I did not give you permission to do >so. > >This is not an issue of who hosts the boards. We have had member >complaints about your habit reposting the same materials which >simply has the effect of bringing your threads to the top of the >list. There is no evidence that you intend discussion. I looked at >the threads when I warned you about this before. I looked at them >again. > >Cheryl Fuller >Assistant Community Producer >Beliefnet.com > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, >confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution >of >this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named >above, >is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from Cheryl >Fuller. >On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 04:44 PM, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >>I believe there are many inaccurracies in your characterization of >>me and understanding of what is transpiring in the bahai message >>boards. >> >>You state: >> >>"posting without permission private email sent to you." >> >>That's false. What post do you refer to? You seem to be merely >>repeating fundamentalist slander from my fellow bahais. >> >>The host BeliefNet has been permitted to take over the bahai boards >>holds many fundamentalist views and has distorted discussion along >>his preferred lines of thought. You seem to be ignoring that fact, >>believed as such by many individuals other than myself. >> >>You are again repeating fundamentalist views and conceptions of >>what is taking place by stating I should "start new threads," >>respond to them, etc., when, in my view, they are the ones >>repeating the same old misrepresentations, slanders, ad hominems, >>against me, for instance, which doesn't seem to bother you nor the >>so-called host. Please explain why that is. >> >>In my view you are not honestly interested in the issues concerned >>and reveal a marked degree of bias and acceptance of fundamentalist >>thinking. >> >>As a member of the bahai faith since 1976, I suggest you read Karen >>Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's >>Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place >>now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control >>in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: >>https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html >> >>Thank you for responding though I neither accept nor agree with >>your interpretations, based on a lack of knowledge, in my generous >>view. >> >>Frederick Glaysher >>The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >>https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >> >> >> >>>From: community@staff.beliefnet.com >>>To: >>>Subject: Your posts in Baha'i C&C >>>Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0400 >>>Received: from [129.33.230.59] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >>>MHotMailBE7DA29C0060400437658121E63B944F0; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 >>>08:17:48 -0700 >>>Received: from cmn1web8.cmn1 (cmn1web8.cmn1 [10.2.2.18])by >>>cmn1mx1.cmn1 (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23657;Wed, 10 Apr 2002 >>>11:10:50 -0400 >>>Received: from mail pickup service by cmn1web8.cmn1 with Microsoft >>>SMTPSVC; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:07:01 -0400 >>>From community@staff.beliefnet.com Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:19:00 -0700 >>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 >>>Message-ID: <02b3f0107150a42CMN1WEB8@cmn1web8.cmn1> >>> >>>Dear Beliefnet member "fglaysher", >>> >>>Despite my earlier e-mail to you, I find that you are continuing >>>to have >>>difficulty getting along in the Beliefnet community. While we >>>welcome your >>>point of view, your behavior is a problem. >>> >>>I must ask you to refrain from making disparaging remarks to >>>others on the >>>basis of their beliefs, even if your opinion is religiously >>>motivated. >>>Secondly you continue to disrupt the Bahai C&C board on Beliefnet >>>by >>>attacking hosts and posting without permission private email sent >>>to you. >>>We recognize that you have strongly-held views. We support your >>>right to >>>express those views in appropriate ways on Beliefnet. If you want >>>to >>>express your views in the Bahai forum, please start a discussion >>>thread, >>>that does not consist wholly of reposted articles, usually >>>containing >>>inflammatory or derogatory remarks, or complaints. >>> >>>This is my second warning to you; a third warning will be >>>accompanied by >>>suspension of your Beliefnet membership privileges. I am hopeful >>>that we >>>can work this out without such drastic action. >>> >>>Cheryl Fuller >>>Assistant Community Producer >>>Beliefnet.com >>> >>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, >>>confidential, and privileged material. Any copying or distribution >>>of >>>this email (or any attachments thereto), beyond recipients named >>>above, >>>is strictly prohibited without prior written permission from >>>Cheryl >>>Fuller. >>> >> >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. >>https://www.hotmail.com > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 6:11 AM Subject: Re: The Catholic Church continues as God promised. See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bill Velek" wrote in message news:3CBCFBBA.6030101@alliancecable.net... ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 6:23 AM Subject: OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented ------ OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." Further details in "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:16 AM Subject: Barthaman - 1998 - AOL Censorship by bahai Fundamentalists FYI --- Dear Frederick, Yes, you can repost my earlier message (below). Best wishes, Barthaman In a message dated 4/10/2002 10:56:24 AM Mountain Daylight Time, FG@ writes: Subj:Your 1998 Message Date:4/10/2002 10:56:24 AM Mountain Daylight Time From: FG@ (Bahai Faith) To: Barthaman@aol.com Barthaman, May I have your explicit permission to repost this? It's come to my attention lately as still as true as ever and I believe others can benefit from the perspective of lapsed time. Thanks. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship From: Barthaman@aol.com To: RBCFAdmin@aol.com Cc: Barthaman@aol.com Subject: Re: Unpopular voices getting equal time.... Date: Thursday, October 01, 1998 4:03 PM RBCF Administration (Jerry White): I just wanted to add my voice to Frederick Glaysher's in the appeal for more tolerance of pluralism (opposing, or dissenting viewpoints) in Baha'i Forums. The substance of what Mr. Glaysher says is absolutely true--I've observed the problem myself for a number of years. Even the most carefully worded, tactful style would be found objectionable by conservative Baha'is in this context--because there are sacred cows in the Baha'i religion, as in other religions, that remain off-limits for questioning. Those who persist in questioning are soon perceived as a mortal threat to the flock of "true believers." Baha'i critics, naturally, are never welcome in "their" forums. Critics like Glaysher (or myself) are immediately singled out for exclusion. We feel our views are just as valid and informative as the messages of the orthodox camp. Sure, we need not be strident, but what justification is there to shield the "true believers" from opposing, responsible views--the same views they will ultimately face in the real world anyway? Counter attacks by the Baha'is on Glaysher (and others) are to be expected. They'll call him anything--"anti-Baha'i," "covenant-breaker"--to dismiss his credibility and weaken his influence. Certainly, in the regard, the Baha'is are anti-democracy--a contradiction in terms of what the internet is all about. So, what is my point? It's that Baha'i forums should be required to make concessions like any other intellectually honest forums, allowing a fair share of unpopular views to contrast what has so far been propagandistic drival and authoritarian muscle-flexing. Glaysher and I believe that the Baha'i Faith is a world-class religion worth a whole lot more than that. We believe that fundamentalist mentalities--believers from Christian and Islamic backgrounds--have usurped all of the mainstream public forums now available to Baha'is--within and without their religious community. In light of the above, please reconsider (if there is room left to do so) Mr. Glaysher's appeals. He does speak for a number of others in this regard. Thanks for "listening." --Barthaman https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL12.htm See also the main AOL menu on my website: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 5:35 PM Subject: Re: The Catholic Church continues as God promised. The founder of Baha'i said that all religions > eventually become meddled by men. Christianity became meddled after c. > 3-centuries, Islam became meddled after c. 4-centuries, and, somewhat > ironically, Baha'i is beginning to be meddled after a century and a half. > > > > cheerz, Bill. -- See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community": https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 5:59 PM Subject: Baha'u'llah - Hidden Words 64. O OPPRESSORS OF EARTH! Withdraw your hands from tyranny, for I have pledged Myself not to forgive any man's injustice. This is My covenant which I have irrevocably decreed in the preserved tablet and sealed it with My seal of glory. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Tyranny.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Justice.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 5:37 AM Subject: Re: The Catholic Church continues as God promised. Even as He hath revealed: "No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers." For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory. Thus hath Muhammad, the Point of the Qur'án, revealed: "I am all the Prophets." Likewise, He saith: "I am the first Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus ." Similar statements have been made by Imám `Alí. Sayings such as these, which indicate the essential unity of those Exponents of Oneness, have also emanated from the Channels of God's immortal utterance, and the Treasuries of the gems of Divine knowledge, and have been recorded in the Scriptures. These Countenances are the recipients of the Divine Command, and the Day Springs of His Revelation. This Revelation is exalted above the veils of plurality and the exigencies of number. Thus He saith: "Our Cause is but One." Inasmuch as the Cause is one and the same, the Exponents thereof also must needs be one and the same. Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, p. 51. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 3:57 PM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: Fwd: Robert Hayden >From: Caroline Murray >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Robert Hayden >Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:56:56 -0500 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [204.60.203.69] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE67882200A140042A22CC3CCB45CC0F0; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:54:59 -0800 >Received: from spunky (204.135.252.64.snet.net [64.252.135.204])by >mta3.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-smtp-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with SMTP id >g2OKrwgp005687for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:53:58 -0500 >(EST) >From cmurr@snet.net Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:56:11 -0800 >Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020324155656.00794a50@pop.snet.net> >X-Sender: cmurr@pop.snet.net (Unverified) >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) > >Dear Mr. Glaysher: > >Today I discovered your website and noticed a Robert Hayden quote praising >you: "A poet now whose work and dedication to a demanding and difficult art >I admire; a man who has the gift of inner grace." > >Please tell me (1) the souce of this quote and (2) how I can obtain a copy, >if that is appropriate. > >For the past three years I've been compiling a series of study guides for >Hayden's poems. I expect to spend at least another three years working on >this project. > >Whether these guides will ever be published remains to be seen. At this >point I'm just field-testing them with fellow Baha'is at firesides and at >Sunday School. I've also had the good fortune to be invited to expand this >field-testing process by facilitating an annual informal "course" at a >University of Connecticut non-credit program called CLIR (Center for >Learning In Retirement). > >I'm sending you this request because I'd like to collect copies of >everything I can find that Hayden wrote including every publication of his >works. I'm also collecting copies of any criticism, as well as any other >mention, of his writings. I haven't counted recently but I think that I've >accumulated over 400 such copies. > >I certainly admire the fine job you did editing Hayden's poems and prose. >In fact, I'm making extensive use of both books you edited. Because I >haven't made any plans as yet to publish and, at this point, I only share >them with the field-testing participants free of any charge, I haven't >sought any copyright permissions. I'm told this is done by the publisher. >I certainly hope I understand this correctly! > >I look forward to hearing from you regarding the above quote. Thank you >very much. > >Sincerely, > >Caroline Murray >63 Pinnacle Road >Ellington, CT 06029 >(860) 872-0705 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ---------- From: Bahai Angst[SMTP:bahaiangst@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:43 PM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: Re: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Dear Fred, I'll be updating soon and will include a link to your site. BA >From: FG >Reply-To: Frederick Glaysher >To: bahaiangst@hotmail.com >Subject: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 10:44:17 -0400 > >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ > >Please consider adding a link to my website on your >Links page. > >thanks. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ---------- From: f_glaysher@hotmail.com[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 7:01 AM To: Chris2153@aol.com Subject: Re: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" Given the seriousness of your concerns, instead of my interpreting what happened, I suggest you read the primary material from people involved with Dialogue and decide for yourself: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl2.htm https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol2/dialog.htm You'll also find a great deal of additional discussion about Dialogue under Juan Cole and numerous other links on my website. Best wishes, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ >From: Chris2153@aol.com >To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com >Subject: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" >Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 06:42:03 EDT >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [205.188.157.36] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE8A90FF00074004325DCDBC9D24EE781; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 03:42:09 -0700 >Received: from Chris2153@aol.comby imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id i.6f.26376bba (4117) for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 06:42:03 -0400 (EDT) >From Chris2153@aol.com Sat, 20 Apr 2002 03:43:09 -0700 >Message-ID: <6f.26376bba.29f29ffb@aol.com> >X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 > >Dear Sir: > >I am the twenty-one year old son of Baha'i parents and have yet to declare. >My recent engagement to a non-Baha'i girl has raised issues of concerns in >regard to Baha'i fundamentalism, and I am now seriously looking into such >issues before I get married, for my family insists that the wedding be a >Baha'i ceremony and this obviously cannot be the case until I declare. As >you appear to be an expert, I have a specific question: the magazine >"Dialogue" that was closed down in the 80s, how exactly was it shut down? >Could the editors have not continued to run the magazine despite the >Universal House's objections? Was the UHJ funding the magazine, making it >impossible to run after their objection or was it as simple as the editors >not wanting to be deemed Covenant Breakers? I suppose the bottom line is, >was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" or was it a >decision that in the end rested on the shoulders of the editors? I >appreciate any information you may give. Thank you. > >Respectfully, > >Chris ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 7:01 AM To: Chris2153@aol.com Subject: Re: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" Given the seriousness of your concerns, instead of my interpreting what happened, I suggest you read the primary material from people involved with Dialogue and decide for yourself: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl2.htm https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol2/dialog.htm You'll also find a great deal of additional discussion about Dialogue under Juan Cole and numerous other links on my website. Best wishes, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ >From: Chris2153@aol.com >To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com >Subject: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" >Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 06:42:03 EDT >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [205.188.157.36] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE8A90FF00074004325DCDBC9D24EE781; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 03:42:09 -0700 >Received: from Chris2153@aol.comby imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id >i.6f.26376bba (4117) for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 >06:42:03 -0400 (EDT) >From Chris2153@aol.com Sat, 20 Apr 2002 03:43:09 -0700 >Message-ID: <6f.26376bba.29f29ffb@aol.com> >X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 > >Dear Sir: > >I am the twenty-one year old son of Baha'i parents and have yet to declare. >My recent engagement to a non-Baha'i girl has raised issues of concerns in >regard to Baha'i fundamentalism, and I am now seriously looking into such >issues before I get married, for my family insists that the wedding be a >Baha'i ceremony and this obviously cannot be the case until I declare. As >you appear to be an expert, I have a specific question: the magazine >"Dialogue" that was closed down in the 80s, how exactly was it shut down? >Could the editors have not continued to run the magazine despite the >Universal House's objections? Was the UHJ funding the magazine, making it >impossible to run after their objection or was it as simple as the editors >not wanting to be deemed Covenant Breakers? I suppose the bottom line is, >was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" or was it >a >decision that in the end rested on the shoulders of the editors? I >appreciate any information you may give. Thank you. > >Respectfully, > >Chris _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. https://www.hotmail.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 5:57 PM Subject: Dialogue - was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" Given the seriousness of your concerns, instead of my interpreting what happened, I suggest you read the primary material from people involved with Dialogue and decide for yourself: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl2.htm https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol2/dialog.htm You'll also find a great deal of additional discussion about Dialogue under Juan Cole and numerous other links on my website. Best wishes, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ -- Dear Sir: I am the twenty-one year old son of Baha'i parents and have yet to declare. My recent engagement to a non-Baha'i girl has raised issues of concerns in regard to Baha'i fundamentalism, and I am now seriously looking into such issues before I get married, for my family insists that the wedding be a Baha'i ceremony and this obviously cannot be the case until I declare. As you appear to be an expert, I have a specific question: the magazine "Dialogue" that was closed down in the 80s, how exactly was it shut down? Could the editors have not continued to run the magazine despite the Universal House's objections? Was the UHJ funding the magazine, making it impossible to run after their objection or was it as simple as the editors not wanting to be deemed Covenant Breakers? I suppose the bottom line is, was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" or was it a decision that in the end rested on the shoulders of the editors? I appreciate any information you may give. Thank you. Respectfully, [name withheld to protect the innocent] ---------- From: f_glaysher@hotmail.com[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:55 PM To: Chris2153@aol.com Subject: Re: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" Chris, You might find some of the responses helpful on talk.religion.bahai on Usenet. Know how to access it? See below: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Usenet.htm I deleted your name and info. Karen Bacquet was an eye witness to Dialogue being denounced. See her many messages too in addition to her recent posts today on talk.religion.bahai: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Bacquet.htm >From: Chris2153@aol.com >To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: Bahai Magazine, "Dialogue" >Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 22:22:36 EDT >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [205.188.157.33] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE8CBEF3002540043713CDBC9D21F4780; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:22:43 -0700 >Received: from Chris2153@aol.comby imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id i.a.1dbb7a63 (3859) for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 22:22:36 -0400 (EDT) >From Chris2153@aol.com Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:23:51 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 > >Thank you sir, I will use the sites you have provided and be in touch. > >Respectfully, >Chris ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:55 PM Subject: Re: Dialogue - was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" You might find some of the responses helpful on talk.religion.bahai on Usenet. Know how to access it? See below: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Usenet.htm Karen Bacquet was an eye witness to Dialogue being denounced. See her many messages too in addition to her recent posts today on talk.religion.bahai: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Bacquet.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship -- Dear Sir: I am the twenty-one year old son of Baha'i parents and have yet to declare. My recent engagement to a non-Baha'i girl has raised issues of concerns in regard to Baha'i fundamentalism, and I am now seriously looking into such issues before I get married, for my family insists that the wedding be a Baha'i ceremony and this obviously cannot be the case until I declare. As you appear to be an expert, I have a specific question: the magazine "Dialogue" that was closed down in the 80s, how exactly was it shut down? Could the editors have not continued to run the magazine despite the Universal House's objections? Was the UHJ funding the magazine, making it impossible to run after their objection or was it as simple as the editors not wanting to be deemed Covenant Breakers? I suppose the bottom line is, was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" or was it a decision that in the end rested on the shoulders of the editors? I appreciate any information you may give. Thank you. Respectfully, [name withheld to protect the innocent] ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:06 PM Subject: Dialogue - was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" Given the seriousness of your concerns, instead of my interpreting what happened, I suggest you read the primary material from people involved with Dialogue and decide for yourself: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl2.htm https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol2/dialog.htm You'll also find a great deal of additional discussion about Dialogue under Juan Cole and numerous other links on my website. Best wishes, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ -- Dear Sir: I am the twenty-one year old son of Baha'i parents and have yet to declare. My recent engagement to a non-Baha'i girl has raised issues of concerns in regard to Baha'i fundamentalism, and I am now seriously looking into such issues before I get married, for my family insists that the wedding be a Baha'i ceremony and this obviously cannot be the case until I declare. As you appear to be an expert, I have a specific question: the magazine "Dialogue" that was closed down in the 80s, how exactly was it shut down? Could the editors have not continued to run the magazine despite the Universal House's objections? Was the UHJ funding the magazine, making it impossible to run after their objection or was it as simple as the editors not wanting to be deemed Covenant Breakers? I suppose the bottom line is, was the UHJ directly responsible for the shut down of "Dialogue" or was it a decision that in the end rested on the shoulders of the editors? I appreciate any information you may give. Thank you. Respectfully, [name withheld to protect the innocent] ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:36 PM To: 1country@bic.org Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem One Country Newsletter of the bahai international community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave permission to the bahai international community to use my private information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. RECID#: 26201 Mr. Frederick Glaysher INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] EXCERPTS: The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense of justice and openness.... The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship POSTED to talk.religion.bahai _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:36 PM Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue One Country Newsletter of the bahai international community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave permission to the bahai international community to use my private information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. RECID#: 26201 Mr. Frederick Glaysher INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] EXCERPTS: The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense of justice and openness.... The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:08 AM Subject: Re: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > One Country > Newsletter of the bahai international community > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > RECID#: 26201 > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > EXCERPTS: > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > of justice and openness.... > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: earthrisepress@hotmail.com[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:13 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Cc: mngof@bic.org; inquiries@un.org Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > One Country > Newsletter of the bahai international community > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > RECID#: 26201 > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > EXCERPTS: > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > of justice and openness.... > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: [SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:13 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Cc: mngof@bic.org; inquiries@un.org Subject: [MFDiscuss] One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... >One Country >Newsletter of the bahai international community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > >Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited >participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave >permission to the bahai international community to use my private >information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > >RECID#: 26201 >Mr. Frederick Glaysher >INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT >[address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > >EXCERPTS: > >The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what >purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of >human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the >esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to >investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > >To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of >other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense >of justice and openness.... > >The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in >international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the >scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that >truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our >diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith >believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then >they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will >lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > >NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > >Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai >coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:22 AM To: earthrisepress@comcast.net Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > One Country > Newsletter of the bahai international community > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > RECID#: 26201 > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > EXCERPTS: > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > of justice and openness.... > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: earthrisepress@hotmail.com[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:38 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Cc: inquiries@un.org; 1country@bic.org; mngof@bic.org Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue On the first page of the list of participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have such explicit WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Form? cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:15:40 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE8F264600BB40043161D8EC896315240; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:06 -0700 >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA28647;Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:08:02 -0400 >From 1country@bic.org Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:58 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >In-Reply-To: > > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >Your address has been removed from our complimentary mailing list. We apologize >for any inconvenience. > >Regards, > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the >Bahá'í International Community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >New York, NY 10017 USA >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 >email: rshoffst@bic.org >web: https://www.onecountry.org >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:36 PM > > To: 1country@bic.org > > Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > One Country > > Newsletter of the bahai international community > > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > > > RECID#: 26201 > > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > > > > EXCERPTS: > > > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > > of justice and openness.... > > > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > POSTED to talk.religion.bahai ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:39 AM Subject: Re: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue On the first page of the list of participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have such explicit WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Form? cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:15:40 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE8F264600BB40043161D8EC896315240; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:06 -0700 >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA28647;Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:08:02 -0400 >From 1country@bic.org Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:58 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >In-Reply-To: > > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >Your address has been removed from our complimentary mailing list. We apologize >for any inconvenience. > >Regards, > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the >Bahá'í International Community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >New York, NY 10017 USA >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 >email: rshoffst@bic.org >web: https://www.onecountry.org >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:36 PM > > To: 1country@bic.org > > Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > One Country > > Newsletter of the bahai international community > > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > > > RECID#: 26201 > > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > > > > EXCERPTS: > > > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > > of justice and openness.... > > > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > POSTED to talk.religion.bahai ---------- From: [SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:38 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Cc: inquiries@un.org; 1country@bic.org; mngof@bic.org Subject: [MFDiscuss] One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue On the first page of the list of participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have such explicit WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Form? cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:15:40 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE8F264600BB40043161D8EC896315240; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:06 -0700 >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) >with SMTP id SAA28647;Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:08:02 -0400 >From 1country@bic.org Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:58 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >In-Reply-To: > > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >Your address has been removed from our complimentary mailing list. We >apologize >for any inconvenience. > >Regards, > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the >Bahá'í International Community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >New York, NY 10017 USA >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 >email: rshoffst@bic.org >web: https://www.onecountry.org >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:36 PM > > To: 1country@bic.org > > Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > One Country > > Newsletter of the bahai international community > > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical >propaganda. > > > > RECID#: 26201 > > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > > > > EXCERPTS: > > > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse >of > > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is >the > > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human >being. > > > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the >eyes of > > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen >sense > > of justice and openness.... > > > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us >that > > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, >then > > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth >will > > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of >bahai > > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > POSTED to talk.religion.bahai _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: https://mobile.msn.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Stock for $4 and no minimums. FREE Money 2002. https://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/ySSFAA/xYTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: MFDiscuss-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to https://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:22 AM To: earthrisepress@comcast.net Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > One Country > Newsletter of the bahai international community > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > > RECID#: 26201 > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > EXCERPTS: > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense > of justice and openness.... > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: [SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:13 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Cc: mngof@bic.org; inquiries@un.org Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue The bahai international community is abusing its access to the Millennium Forum's list of participants by improperly using people's addresses. See link below for the list of participants: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." There are 335 pages of names and addresses, mine being only one among the many thousands to whom the bahai international community has been sending its deceptive propaganda piece now for over two years. Notice that the contact email for the Millennium Forum has a "bic" domain, bahai international community, mngof@bic.org and can hardly be trusted to handle properly any complaint since THEY ARE the problem, which leaves little choice but to appeal elsewhere: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa4k7j$7mfav$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... >One Country >Newsletter of the bahai international community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > >Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited >participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave >permission to the bahai international community to use my private >information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical propaganda. > >RECID#: 26201 >Mr. Frederick Glaysher >INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT >[address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > >EXCERPTS: > >The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what >purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse of >human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is the >esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to >investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human being. > >To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the eyes of >other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen sense >of justice and openness.... > >The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in >international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the >scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us that >truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our >diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith >believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, then >they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth will >lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > >NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > >Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of bahai >coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 3:15 PM Subject: Re: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Form? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal > -----Original Message----- > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM > To: 1country@bic.org > Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > On the first page of the list of participants it is > clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference > and should not be used in any other fashion without the > written permission of the Millennium Forum." > https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > > As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have > such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > > cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 3:17 PM To: 1country@bic.org Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Form? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal >-----Original Message----- >From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM >To: 1country@bic.org >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem > > >On the first page of the list of participants it is >clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference >and should not be used in any other fashion without the >written permission of the Millennium Forum." >https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > >As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have >such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > >cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---------- From: earthrisepress@hotmail.com[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 3:20 PM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Forum? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal > -----Original Message----- > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM > To: 1country@bic.org > Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > On the first page of the list of participants it is > clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference > and should not be used in any other fashion without the > written permission of the Millennium Forum." > https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > > As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have > such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > > cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 8:29 AM Subject: It's a FACT - More Hits than USA bahais - 28,000+ The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience It's a FACT - More Hits than USA bahais - 28,000+ -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 6:52 AM Subject: Re: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue Please note how convenient it is that "Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled" at this time.... Wonder who made or influenced that decision.... ---- We are unable to deliver the message from to . Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled. For further assistance, please email support@yahoogroups.com or visit https://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From : "" To : MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject : One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 20:20:30 +0000 You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Forum? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal >-----Original Message----- >From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM >To: 1country@bic.org >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem > > >On the first page of the list of participants it is >clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference >and should not be used in any other fashion without the >written permission of the Millennium Forum." >https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > >As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have >such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > >cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > ---------- From: earthrisepress@hotmail.com[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 6:52 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Please note how convenient it is that "Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled" at this time.... Wonder who made or influenced that decision.... ---- We are unable to deliver the message from to . Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled. For further assistance, please email support@yahoogroups.com or visit https://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From : "" To : MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject : One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 20:20:30 +0000 You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Forum? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal >-----Original Message----- >From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM >To: 1country@bic.org >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem > > >On the first page of the list of participants it is >clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference >and should not be used in any other fashion without the >written permission of the Millennium Forum." >https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > >As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have >such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > >cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 7:09 AM Subject: Re: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-December 2001 Issue We are unable to deliver the message from to . Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled. For further assistance, please email support@yahoogroups.com or visit https://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From : "" To : MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject : One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Fri, 26 Apr 2002 11:52:32 +0000 Please note how convenient it is that "Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled" at this time.... Wonder who made or influenced that decision.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 7:13 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Faith in a Nutshell -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:_U5y8.311$q9.54824@news1.telusplanet.net... Baha'i Faith in a Nutshell: https://www.telusplanet.net/public/mesbah/oneness/bahai_faith_nutshell.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 7:29 AM Subject: Re: It's a FACT - More Hits than USA bahais - 28,000+ The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Karen Bacquet: Disillusionment with Baha'i Life The Baha'i Faith in the U.S. claims to have 140,000 members, but it is axiomatic among Baha'is that half of these on the rolls are permanently inactive and have lost contact with the community. The inactivity rate may well be higher; one independent poll estimated the number of Americans identifying themselves as Baha'is to be only 28,000.[14] [14] Adherents.com Index.(n.d.). Retrieved January 9, 2002 from https://www.adherents.com/Na_41.html This cites Kosmin, B. & S. Lachman.(1993). One nation under God: Religion in contemporary American society. New York: Harmony Books, pp. 15-17. Kosmin and Lachman say on the issue of the Baha'i undercount: "... possible that our methodology [over 100,000 phone surveys] tended to undercount groups that live in communal settings... [This] was suggested to us by the Baha'i..., [which] claims 110,000 adherents nationwide... we found only 28,000 " Baha'is do not live "in communal settings", however, the phone survey may have failed to take into account Baha'i family members living in the same household. One reason for the highly inflated membership statistics is that members of the Baha'i Faith are only removed from the rolls if they write a letter of resignation to the National Spiritual Assembly; most former converts drift away without doing so. As Adherents.com reported "As is typical with a religious group made up primarily of converts, Baha'is who drift from active participation in the movement are less likely to retain nominal identification with the religion -- because it was not the religion of their parents or the majority religion of the surrounding culture." Excerpt from Karen Bacquet in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community": https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aa90e4$8vk1v$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > It's a FACT - More Hits than USA bahais - 28,000+ > > -- > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > ---------- From: [SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 6:52 AM To: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Please note how convenient it is that "Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled" at this time.... Wonder who made or influenced that decision.... ---- We are unable to deliver the message from to . Posting to this group has been temporarily disabled. For further assistance, please email support@yahoogroups.com or visit https://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ From : "" To : MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com Subject : One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - OctDec01Issue Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 20:20:30 +0000 You dodged, not answered, my question. On the first page of the list of Millennium Forum participants it is clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference and should not be used in any other fashion without the written permission of the Millennium Forum." https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have WRITTEN PERMISSION from the Millennium Forum? (That's a yes or no question.) My name and address NEVER appeared anywhere else other than the Millennium Forum list and I immediately began receiving unsolicited copies of One Country following the Forum in May of 2000. Your explanation is false. ----- Dear Mr. Glaysher, We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from any one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of prominent people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your name made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing list. The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our readers are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development activities and in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as in learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, as you did, and their record is deleted from our files. I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your name has been removed from our mailing list. Sincerely, Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the Bahá'í International Community 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 New York, NY 10017 USA tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 email: rshoffst@bic.org web: https://www.onecountry.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." Bahá'u'lláh From : "One Country" <1country@bic.org> To : "Frederick Glaysher" Subject : RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal >-----Original Message----- >From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM >To: 1country@bic.org >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem > > >On the first page of the list of participants it is >clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a reference >and should not be used in any other fashion without the >written permission of the Millennium Forum." >https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > >As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have >such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > >cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 4:21 PM Subject: WHY I CANNOT "DECLARE" WHY I CANNOT "DECLARE" (Identity withheld upon request) April 26, 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WHY I CANNOT "DECLARE" After several years of deep consideration and study of the Bahá'í Faith, I have chosen not to "declare." While I hope that some may reflect upon my own views, I hope even further that people will continue their own independent investigations of truth. This should in no way be regarded as condemnation of the Faith, a beautiful religion. Rather, my refusal to "declare" should be regarded as protest toward the treatment of intellectual and liberal Bahá'ís who have been shunned by the Bahá'í community. In other religious movements, so-called "dissenters" have been the only obstacle for fundamentalists who may now be blamed for the post-September 11 world we live in. The Bahá'í Faith is no exception and voices of differing opinions should be valued, even if not agreed with. Shame on those who have ostracized these brave souls. You who forgotten `Abdu'l-Bahá, as He declared: "The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions." My mom was born and raised a Bahá'í in Iran, a country not known for liberalism. Despite this, she maintained a progressive attitude in regard to my religious upbringing. My dad is an American who had been raised Baptist. The fundamentalism entrenched in that denomination initiated his negative outlook upon organized religion. The Bahá'í Faith became an exception: He â?declaredâ? shortly after meeting my mom. Like many liberal Americans, he was enticed to become a Bahá'í by way of the Faithâ?Ts progressive doctrine. Both of my parents were the nonconformists from their respective families, both being far more liberal than any of their relatives. However, it is fair to say that my mom was more conservative than my dad, which can be attributed to her having grown up in Iran. Nevertheless, she and my dad agreed on the role religion should play in my life. They at no time attempted to force the Bahá'í Faith upon me. My dad had come to resent his parents for having forced him to attend church as a child and this undoubtedly instigated his rejection of the Baptist religion. Learning from my grandparentsâ?T mistakes, my own parents encouraged a healthy tolerance toward religions outside the Bahá'í Faith. This tolerance was not limited to a "live and let live" approach. Rather, they supported my active interest in religious alternatives and at my behest allowed me to attend a Christian scripture class (which were offered in the public schools where I grew up). However, my indoctrination did not go unmonitored: The minute I revealed that my teacher had told her students that "All good people go to church," they pulled me out of the classes. From that point on, I had to go to the library during the hours every Wednesday when the class was being taught. I found myself among the exiled: a range of minority students, whose religious practices varied as much as their skin colors. It was there that my curiosity flourished and I found myself much more happy to spend Wednesday afternoons in the library amongst the adherents of "miscellaneous" religions rather than within the overwhelmingly pale facade of the scripture class. This is not to say that I did not learn about my parentsâ?T religion. I attended my fair share of Bahá'í classes, Feasts, workshops, celebrations, etc. Although I often enjoyed interaction within the Bahá'í community, I was never as devoted as other Bahá'í youth. I recall loving Bahá'u'lláh, `Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi (the central figures of the Faith) and believing Their teachings would be instrumental toward the development of a new and better world. However, I believe my exposure to diversity and my parentsâ?T support of such contact immediately sheltered my heart and mind from any dogma that suggested Bahá'ís are "chosen" or "more enlightened." Some Bahá'ís may very well believe this, but in fairness so do many followers of any other religion. I do not suggest that this sentiment is shared in greater proportion within the Bahá'í community than it does within, say, among Christians. Rather, I am merely trying to account for my apparent restricted level of devotion toward the Faith, when contrasted with other Bahá'í youth. While Bahá'ís pride themselves on great diversity within their worldwide community (ethnic, national and racial; not intellectual), there is no doubting that there is a consensus within the community that since they are followers of the most recent religion, they must also be more enlightened than people of other faiths. It is hard to go along with this when you see religions as equal (which Bahá'ís claim to do). Yet such sentiments do appear to belie the tolerance the community publicly advocates (at least in my experience both in youth and in adulthood). My mom passed away in the early 1990s. Her death prompted a feud between my momâ?Ts side of the family (who hail from Iran) and my dad, regarding my momâ?Ts estate. The bitterness soon led to my dadâ?Ts inactive status as a Bahá'í. This had nothing to do with the Faith, but rather with the pain my dad would experience from being around Persians. Even in the U.S., it is impossible to separate the Bahá'í community from its Persian adherents. It is noteworthy that my dad remains a Bahá'í, but is simply not active within the community. This did not remove the Faith entirely from my life, although it did limit its sphere of influence. In light of the feud and seeing the anguish my newly widowed father had to endure, I decided not to associate with my momâ?Ts family. However, my dad convinced me that the bitterness was not my concern and that being with my momâ?Ts relatives was necessary for both them and me. Soon after I had resumed relationships with them, my aunt tried to convince my dad to force me to attend Bahá'í classes here in the U.S. Although he did discuss with me the possibility of my attendance, he obviously did not fall back on his own parentsâ?T tactics. Every so often I attended classes, but this was because my aunt would offer to baby-sit me over weekends and then took me involuntarily. She was not kidnapping me, though I believe it may sound like it from what I am writing. In fairness, she was simply doing what she believed to be right. But once I was old enough (and brave enough) to simply refuse to go, my involvement with the community was put on hiatus. Undoubtedly, my momâ?Ts family blames my dadâ?Ts refusal to force religious adherence on me as the slippery slope to my refusal to â?odeclare.â? A relative once told me that I â?oneed the Faith so I donâ?Tt do things like drugs.â? Well, I am happy to report that I managed to forestall the use of drugs through knowledge and self-respect, not faith. While my family would like to see me adhere to the Faith with their level of devotion, I simply cannot blindly believe in anything without questioning it. A Bahá'í true to the Teachings rejects superstition and independently investigates truth. In a copy of the Bible my dad passed down to me at age five, he inscribed "Leave no stone unturned in your search for truth." In this respect, my dadâ?Ts unwillingness to force his son into becoming a Bahá'í gave me a sense of objectivity with which I may view the Faith. If I do decide to "declare" eventually, it will be because of immense respect for the religion rather than because it is the faith of my family. Religion played very little importance in my life throughout high school. After studying the 1925 Scopes "Monkey" Trial, I harbored a strong disregard toward religion for a couple of years. Then, my senior year of high school, I represented my school at a summer camp established to promote liberal ideals such as racial and sexual equality, world peace, religious tolerance, etc. It was a very Bahá'í concept and there was in fact a Bahá'í counselor was present. My favorite event at the camp was a panel of religious representatives: a Hindu, Buddhist, Jew, Protestant, Catholic, Muslim and Bahá'í. To hear these men and women talk of their respective religions and to see the consistency of their doctrines inspired me greatly. I realized that the voice of fundamentalists was not the only religious tone to be heard and I returned to the Bahá'í Faith on my own accord. I did not "declare" right away. I did not believe it was appropriate to do so without a better grasp on the precepts of the Faith. That is what I have been doing these last few years: studying the Faith with the intent to "declare." I was able to study at my leisure because I never saw the urgency of "declaring." After all, the Faith is a religion, not a country club. Recently, I found myself ready to finally make my status as a Bahá'í "official." However, I soon encountered a red flag. My girlfriend and I moved in together. Such a move would be condemned by any fundamentalist (Bahá'ís included) and it is not necessarily a move I would recommend for all young couples who are dating. However, I assure the reader that our circumstances were (and continue to be) unique and that this was our only option. Interestingly enough, I wanted to initially get married but my momâ?Ts family disapproved and insisted that if we were going to stay together that living together was preferable to a prudent marriage (and I wholeheartedly agree). However, after about a year and a half (seeing that the two of us were staying together despite their objections), they insisted that we get married. In part, their insistence was based upon the fact that I showed an interest in finally "declaring." Here enters the red flag: My aunt told me that were I to "declare" while living with my girlfriend out of wedlock, the community could "take action." She was deliberately vague on what this meant, so I was forced to enquire. Years of research on the abundance of positive aspects of the Faith had yielded an optimistic outlook on my part. However, now I was through the looking glass and my research was redirected to any negative aspects. It is important to note that I did not initially look into biased material (a good researcher must remain objective). I went straight to the Bahá'í Writings and there are few aspects within the Writings that could disenchant a liberal. Rather, it is the current community and Bahá'í hierarchy that disgraces Bahá'u'lláh and the liberal tenets of the Faith. Having laid out my experience, I will now list the qualms I have about the Faith and it is my hope that the Universal House of Justice will someday explain their justification of such concerns rather than simply ignore them as they have been doing. I beg individual Bahá'ís to consider whether or not this is the purpose of religion? If you believe it is not, then please let your voice be heard. They cannot silence us all. 1. Bahá'í Hierarchy. a. Infallibility of the Universal House of Justice (UHJ). It is difficult to accept that any elected body compromised of human beings is infallible. To believe otherwise is superstitious. Most Bahá'í intellectuals believe that what was meant by the word "infallible" was that the UHJ could not render a decision under impure (or fallible) motives, yet this opinion is almost never voiced due to fear instilled by the threat of being deemed a Covenant Breaker by Bahá'í authorities. b. Power. Bahá'u'lláh did not vest authoritarian power to the UHJ. However, the notion of Covenant Breaking (i.e. fear among adherents) has allowed the assembly to exceed their authority. Only `Abdu'l-Bahá and The Guardian were authorized interpreters of the Writings, which suggests that "law" beyond The Guardian would be advisory in nature only, not religious. Members of the community are often inspired to spy on one another. If any dissent, or practices contrary to the Teachings, is perceived, intimidation could (and has been) used. If it is successful, the independent thinker (or "heretic") is silenced, less they be declared a Covenant Breaker or sanctioned. If it is not successful, they are no longer considered a Bahá'í, either by way of expulsion or via pressure to resign: Who wants to remain in a community where everyone considers you "spiritually polluted?" If free will is relevant at all, then the severity of a "sin" is between God and the individual (such as my living out of wedlock). The power to revoke oneâ?Ts religious identity is horrifying and a specific reason for such action is often not provided. Most often, Bahá'í authoritiesbelieve a person should automatically know what questionable action they have undertaken. This is simply because they do not wish to go on record and be thought of as intolerant, tarnishing the forbearing image they have maintained. Harsh interrogations of suspected dissenters have been reported. Did Bahá'u'lláh authorize the establishment of Auxiliary Board Members (basically the UHJâ?Ts answer to thought police)? d. Election. Bahá'ís believe their election process to be a superior form of election since campaigning and political backbiting is prohibited in order to end partisanship and promote unity. However, there are other ways to avoid the corruption that accompanies politics and this particular method leaves the Bahá'í community uninformed in regard to where the "candidates" stand on any given issue. This allows members to get in on name recognition alone and who controls whether or not an individual is recognized within the community? A strict rule of censorship is imposed by the UHJ, whereby they must approve all pre-published material regarding the Faith. This allows the body to control exactly who gains name recognition and of course allows the incumbents to stay in office, retaining a conservative congress. 3. Injunction against entering politics. Although many Bahá'ís believe this to refer only to partisan politics (i.e. the two party and divisive system here in the U.S.), it really is much broader. The UHJ issued a letter to a Bahá'í woman informing her that she should no longer be a member of Amnesty International as it is a form of political activism. Well, activism does not necessarily entail partisanship, as Amnesty International is not a political party. Political involvement should be contingent upon a personâ?Ts own conscience and (I believe) is often essential to the betterment of society. Perhaps my fourth (and most important) concern provides a clue as to why the UHJ enforces this policy. 4. Rejection of separation of religion and state. Bahá'ís view their hierarchy as an embryonic governmental system that will not only have religious authority, but will eventually have world governing authority (i.e. a political force to be reckoned with). Only enrolled Bahá'ís may vote for their representatives, so this suggests that the future government is contingent upon the participation of only enrolled Bahá'ís (i.e. no religious minorities or Bahá'ís who have been revoked of voting privileges). Bahá'ís regard this as the blending of the best aspects of both democracy and theocracy but no political scientist in their right mind would regard this as nothing short of a theocracy. As this is my most vital concern, I will elaborate. To emphasize the importance of separation of religion and state is not to stand narrowly behind American ideology, less I be accused of nationalism. Rather, this sentiment is shared by many across the globe and was supported by Bahá'u'lláh Himself. It has been supported by all the Manifestations, as Christian fundamentalists in my own country are willing to ignore. Does â?oRender onto Caesar what is Caesarâ?Ts; render onto God what is Godâ?Tsâ? ring any bells? As for the Bahá'í Faith, I strongly advocate the establishment of the World Commonwealth, but only as a secular body. The separation of religion and state is there to protect both religion and state from one another and critical to the survival of any civilization. Are we to believe that simply because the Bahá'í Faith is the most recent (and therefore most "enlightened") religion that it is somehow impervious to the dangers of fundamentalism? Bahá'ís should not be so careless as to adopt a system that has plunged modern-day Iran into the abyss of theocratic intolerance and ignorance. Just as religions are universal in fostering ideals of compassion, they remain consistent in regard to their susceptibility toward the dogmatic objectives of conservative adherents (or, fundamentalists). If the Bahá'í Faith is to be unique and not fall down this dark and evil path, should not such objectives be condemned as obsolete, harmful and un-Bahá'í? Let us hope so, or it will be The Most Great Peace that is obsolete, Bahá'ís who are harmful and only the enlightened shall be regarded as un-Bahá'í. The Universal House of Justice must reconsider its actions and ask itself whether or not it intends to act as the zealots who now govern Iran and have persecuted so many Bahá'ís? Are they a spiritual body, in existence to offer advice or authoritarians with the unquestionable power to exert abuse? I feel as if I have been letdown and perhaps other good people have been let down who would have otherwise joined the Cause. Did Christ require a membership card for Salvation? I am a Bahá'í and do not require a slip of paper to believe in Bahá'u'lláh, nor would He have wanted it that way. Why would the Bahá'í community knowingly turn so many away from the Faith? Please reconsider what the impending authority of the Universal House of Justice is doing to our beloved religion and remember His words: "The light of men is justice. Quench it not with the contrary winds of tyranny." I thank the reader. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/WhyIcannotD.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 4:23 PM Subject: Re: WHY I CANNOT "DECLARE" Read it on my website without the lines wrapped: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/WhyIcannotD.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:44 AM Subject: OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented..... OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1.OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented Invented OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." Further details in "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:13 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Faith: Basic Facts The FACTS bahai fundamentalists won't tell you-- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:71jz8.588$LC2.27627@news0.telusplanet.net... Principles of the Bahá'í Faith There is only one God The foundation of all Divine religions is the same The oneness of the world of humanity All men have been created to carry forward an ever-advancing civilization The peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. He Who is your Lord, the All-Merciful, cherisheth in His heart the desire of beholding the entire human race as one soul and one body The purpose of religion is to promote love and unity The object is none other than the betterment of the world and the tranquility of its peoples Religion is a mighty stronghold, but that it must engender love and be the cause of fellowship, not malevolence and hate Religion must be in conformity with science and reason Religion should be the cause of love and unity This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future Prejudices strike at the very root of human life Independent investigation of truth should replace blind imitations Man's true freedom is in his submission to the Laws of God The family is the foundation of human society Marriage is a means for spiritual development of both partners The family, being a human unit, must be educated according to the rules of sanctity. All the virtues must be taught the family. Every child must receive a sound education Mother is the first teacher and that it is she who establishes the character and conduct of the child Men and women should enjoy equal sharing in all rights and privileges Women and men have been and will always be equal in the sight of God Living a moral life has a direct influence on our spiritual happiness and development Consultation is a dynamic process for finding truth and for solving conflicts and problems Extremes of wealth and poverty must be abolished Struggle for existence is the fountain-head of all calamities and is the supreme affliction A universal language should be taught along with the mother tongue throughout the world A world government must safeguard a permanent and universal peace All mankind is created as noble and spiritual beings. The soul continues its everlasting life after death Patriotic prejudice is due to absolute ignorance, for the surface of the earth is one native land The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens Struggle for existence must be replaced with cooperation and voluntary sharing Man's freedom from the captivity of the world of nature Preservation of human honor The religion of God is for love and unity, make it not the cause of enmity and dissension Material civilization needs to be combined with Divine civilization in order to bring about the felicity of mankind Establishment of a Universal Religion Establishment of a Supreme Tribunal Economic problem cannot be solved without spiritual principles Establishment of a world commonwealth Establishment of a world legislature Establishment of a world executive, backed by an international Force Establishment of a world metropolis as nerve center of future world civilization A world script A world literature A uniform and universal system of currency, of weights and measures A world federal system in which Force is made the servant of Justice, based on universal recognition of one God Soon will the present-day order be rolled up, and a new one spread out in its stead Bahá'ís follow the moral code of the Ten Commandments --and more. Bahá'u'lláh forbids: Killing Stealing Lying Adultery and promiscuity Gambling Alcoholic drinks Drug abuse Gossip and backbiting Bahá'ís strive to uphold a high moral standard. Bahá'u'lláh stressed the importance of: Honesty Trustworthiness Chastity Service to others Purity of motive Generosity Deeds over words Unity Work as a form of worship -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net > Basic Facts ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:14 AM Subject: Re: When was Jesus annointed? Since Messiah or Christ means annointed? The FACTS bahai fundamentalists won't tell you-- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:aGkz8.238$Xt3.27744@news1.telusplanet.net... In his writings, Baha'u'llah 'unseals' the truth and the 'hidden meanings of those subjects which have long troubled and confused mankind, such as: The Day of Judgement Resurrection Baptism The Eucharist The Trinity Reincarnation The Creation of the World Proofs of the Existence of God Life After Death The Immortality of the School The Story of Adam and Eve Good and Evil The Son of God The Father Heaven and Hell The Stars Falling from Heaven The Darkening of the Sun and the Moon The Day of God The City of God The Seal of the Prophets The Return These and many other subjects are revealed in their true meaning by Baha'u'llah, whose fresh and clear explanations harmonize with science and education and broaden the outlook of humanity. These have been explained in detail in the Book The Wine of Astonishment. Enoch, in speaking of the Messiah of the time of the end, promised: 'This is the Son of man...who will reveal all the treasure of that which is concealed.' [Enoch 46:3.] The second of these two books I have called Fire in the Sky. It tells the story of Baha'u'llah's letters to the kings and rulers of the world. (Published as The Prisoner and the Kings.) Baha'u'llah addressed them saying: 'O Kings of the earth! We see you increasing every year your expenditures and laying the burden thereof on your subjects. This, verily, is wholly and grossly unjust...lay not excessive burdens on your peoples. Do not rob them to rear palaces for yourselves; nay rather, choose for them that which ye choose for yourselves...Your people are your treasures. Beware lest your rule violate the commandments of God, and ye deliver your wards to the hands of the robber. By them ye rule, by their means ye subsist, by their aid ye conquer. Yet, how disdainfully ye look upon them! How strange, how very strange!' [The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, p. 26.] In another place Baha'u'llah wrote to the kings and rulers: 'O kings of the earth...Compose your differences, and reduce your armaments, that the burden of your expenditures may be lightened, and that your minds and hearts may be tranquillised. Heal the dissensions that divide you...and ye be the emblems of justice amongst them (mankind).' [The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 21-22.] And again: 'If ye stay not the hand of the oppressor, if ye fail to safeguard the rights of the downtrodden, what right have ye then to vaunt yourselves among men?' [The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, p. 22.] Baha'u'llah informed the monarchs of the world by whose authority he spoke, saying: 'I am the One Whom the tongue of Isaiah hath extolled, the One with Whose name both the Torah (of Moses) and the Evangel (of Christ) were adorned...' [The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, p. 34.] Baha'u'llah addressed letters to: Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria Napoleon III of France Kaiser William I of Germany Czar Nicolaevitch Alexander II of Russia The Sultan 'Abdu'l-Aziz of Turkey Nasiri'd-Din Shah of Persia Queen Victoria of Britain The Presidents and Rulers of the Republics of the West The Religious Leaders of the Christians, Jews, Muslims and Zoroastrians The followers of Christ, Moses, and Mohammed The peoples of the world Napoleon III cast Baha'u'llah's letter aside scornfully, saying, 'If this man is of God, I am two Gods!' Shortly after, Napoleon fell from power as prophesied by Baha'u'llah, and ended his days in exile, after suffering a humiliating imprisonment. Only one of these sovereigns responded, even in the slightest measure. It was Queen Victoria in Great Britain. This dynasty is the only one which still remains today of those once-mighty monarchies. Baha'u'llah foretold that Queen Victoria would have a long and successful reign, although at the time her health was precarious and she was not in favour because of her German consort. Of far more arresting interest is the fact that still another Sovereign, a grand-daughter of Queen Victoria, became a follower of Baha'u'llah. I found these words of Queen Marie of Rumania concerning Baha'u'llah and his Faith, quoted in the Toronto Daily Star, May 14th, 1926: 'It (Baha'u'llah's Faith) is Christ's message taken up anew...No man could fail to be better because of this Book. I commend it to you all.' She was quoted in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin, September 27th, 1926 as follows: 'Those who read their Bible with "peeled eyes" will find in almost every line some revelation.' She also wrote in a personal letter: 'These Books (the writings of Baha'u'llah's Faith), have strengthened me beyond belief...The Baha'i teaching brings peace and understanding.' [Appreciations of the Baha'i Faith, pp. 12-13.] (William Sears, Thief in the Night) -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:16 AM Subject: Re: Baha'u'llah against injustice, tyranny & corruption https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Justice.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Tyranny.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:LP0z8.9677$q9.279965@news1.telusplanet.net... ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:19 AM Subject: Re: COVENANT AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY The FACTS bahai fundamentalists won't tell you-- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:ujjy8.2351$%9.167743@news0.telusplanet.net... Wendy M. Heller explores the religious origins of the organizing principles of civil society, tracks their secularization in the modern era, and examines the prospect of an inclusive global moral order based on the enduring concept of covenant. COVENANT AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY Over a century ago, Bahá'u'lláh, Founder of the Bahá'í Faith, wrote of the impending disintegration and collapse of the established order of civilization: "Soon will the present-day order be rolled up," He proclaimed, "and a new one spread out in its stead."1 In the interval, experience has borne out the prescience of revelation; this century has seen Bahá'u'lláh's prophetic terms, of disequilibrium and chaos, of the shaking of foundations, become so much a part of daily life that, because of the pervasiveness of such disintegration, some have been led to mistake an abnormal state for a normal one, and to conclude that there simply are no foundations for any human endeavor, and that, in consequence, strife and conflict are the inevitable condition of existence. Yet an increasing number of scholars are now willing to shed the "obtuse secularism"2 that, as a feature of contemporary frameworks of thought, has systematically excluded serious appraisal of the central importance religion and spiritual reality in human life and society. Faced the evidence of the bankruptcy of modernity, whose promises prosperity through materialism and ideology have proven hollow, thinkers and scholars have begun to turn the light of critical scrutiny upon the far-reaching effects that the displacement of religion secular ideology has had on civilization in the modem era. That same secularism which was once heralded as the emancipation civilization is now increasingly identified as the root cause of disintegration. This conclusion had been anticipated in the Bahá'í writings which affirm that social and moral deterioration is directly related to the decline of religion as a social force. "Religion Bahá'u'lláh wrote, "is verily the chief instrument for the establishment of order in the world and of tranquillity amongst peoples. The weakening of the pillars of religion hath strengthened the foolish and emboldened them and made them more arrogant. Verily I say: The greater the decline of religion, the more grievous the waywardness of the ungodly. This cannot but lead in the end to chaos and confusion."3 Material civilization cut loose from the moderating influence of spiritual values, He warned, "will prove as prolific a source of evil as it had been goodness when kept within the restraints of moderation...The day is approaching when its flame will devour the cities..."4 Affirming the central role of religion in the civilizing of hum character, 'Abdu'l-Bahá explained: Universal benefits derive from the grace of the Divine religions, for they lead their true followers to sincerity of intent, to high purpose, to purity and spotless honor, to surpassing kindness and compassion, to the keeping of their covenants when they have covenanted, to concern for the rights of others, to liberality, to justice in every aspect of life, to humanity and philanthropy, to valor and to unflagging efforts in the service of mankind. It is religion, to sum up, which produces all human virtues, and it is these virtues which are the bright candles of civilization.5 In the 1930s Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith, singled out as an agent of social decline the "prevailing spirit of modernism with its emphasis on a purely materialistic philosophy which, as it diffuses itself, tends to divorce religion from man's daily life," resulting in the erosion of "conceptions of duty, of solidarity, of reciprocity and loyalty" as the center of gravity shifts to the individual self. Symptoms of such a society that has lost its spiritual bearings, he wrote, include religious intolerance, racism and xenophobia, terrorism, crime, alcoholism, the weakening of the family, and the breakdown of political and economic structures, to name but a few.6 In the Bahá'í view, however, the current experience of disorder and turmoil is only one aspect of a two-fold process that is ultimately therapeutic and evolutionary, rather than solely destructive. It clears the way for a recovery and renewal of the true and enduring foundations upon which a global moral order can be constructed. Though grounded in eternal verities, this process of spiritual and social evolution is forward looking and cannot be confused with a return to a vanished and unrecoverable past. Sociologist Robert Bellah has remarked that the characteristic modem attempt to substitute "a technical-rational model of politics for a religious-moral one does not seem to me to be an advantage. Indeed it only exacerbates tendencies that I think are at the heart of our problems. If our problems are, as I believe them to be, centrally moral and even religious, then the effort to sidestep them with purely technical organizational considerations can only worsen them." Although the contemporary combination of the morality of self-interest, capitalism, and technological rationality has departed from the earlier religious and moral world view, he argues, it does not follow that the only possible alternative to modem secularism is the "literal revival of that earlier conception." Indeed, he suggests, "only a new imaginative, religious, moral, and social context for science and technology will make it possible to weather the storms that seem to be closing in on us in the late 20th century."7 more... https://www.telusplanet.net/public/mesbah/oneness/civil_society.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:27 AM Subject: bahai - Three Messages to bahai Taliban - +++++++++ bahai - Three Messages to bahai Taliban - bahai - Three Messages to bahai Taliban - March 31, 1997 The Universal House of Justice of the Bahais of the World Haifa, Israel Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: After careful reflection and prayer for the past few days, I've decided that open public discussion and knowledge are more important than my own status as a Bahai. I have been a Bahai for more than twenty years, since 1976. I became a Bahai by reading almost every single Bahai book published at the time. Given my background as a Catholic and poet, I was deeply moved by the beauty and profundity of the Bahai Writings. As a young person, I spent two months travel teaching throughout Michigan with several other youthful, innocent Bahais. Like many, I have sacrificed financially to contribute to the Bahai Faith. I pioneered for a year and a half in Japan, for two years on an American Indian reservation, and have travel taught in China. The spiritual profundity of the Bahai vision, as reflected in the work of the African-American poet Robert Hayden, inspired me to study at the University of Michigan under him and to spend considerable time and labor editing his collected poems and prose for Liveright and the University of Michigan Press. I have published two essays in the Bahai magazine World Order and spent more time than I can remember at Bahai summer camps, workshops, and deepenings. Throughout all my varied Bahai experience, I have loved the Figures and Teachings of the Faith even as the conviction has grown that all information and discussion in the Bahai Faith is subtly manipulated, controlled, and distorted for the "good of the Faith." There seems to be a pervasive, rigid control of all thought, ideas, and information that calls into question the motives of the individuals in power in the Bahai Administration. As a published writer and former college and university instructor of rhetoric and literature for over ten years, I believe the whole process of "review" has become a complete farce and disgrace to the Bahai Faith and is suggestive of the worst censorship under the most repressive regimes, religious or secular, of historical experience. If one truly wishes to understand why many Bahais, both highly educated and others, leave the Bahai Faith or become "inactive" and withdraw into silence and uninvolvement with the religion, one need only to look objectively at what seems to be the oppressive and coercive methods of people in the Bahai Administration itself to find the answer. My experiencing of these same methods of censorship and distortion on soc.religion.bahai proved to be the last intolerable straw. My attempt to form an unmoderated newsgroup on the Internet that no one could manipulate and censor has a long experience of Bahai tyranny in the background. The resorting to deceit and back-channel communication by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai and others naively believing they're working for the benefit of the Bahai Faith by campaigning for 691 unethical NO votes on talk.religion.bahai further proves the pervasive acceptance of disreputable tactics by Bahais in their attempt to maintain a stranglehold over all thought and discussion. Recently, more than ever, I've often recalled the words to me in private several times of Robert Hayden, the only Bahai to be appointed Consultant in Poetry to the Library of Congress: "Why I continue to have anything to do with the Bahai Faith, I do not know, I do not know." I myself no longer know. I suppose I hope that the oppressive, coercive methods that have come to be accepted and justified in the Bahai Administration, demonstrated for instance in the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the incidents surrounding the Bahai Encyclopedia, the listserv Talisman I, and the continuingly crude, unreadable propoganda vehicle of the American Bahai, might yet be put aside in favor of the beautiful vision of Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha for freedom of religious conscience and belief and a humane, tolerant universalism. I fear that all too often the religious totalitarianism of Baha'u'llah's fanatical homeland has seeped into every nook and cranny of His religion, smothering out the free light of the human soul and hamstringing His Administration. It was with the bitterest of feelings that I observed some time ago the Bahai exhibition, a deceitful propaganda event really, on freedom of religious conscience and belief sponsored by the National Spiritual Assembly in the rotunda of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., so far in reality from the truth was it, so misled, trusting, and uninformed were the Congressmen of my country.... If censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith, I would like to know what passages of the Bahai Writings support it and what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship. It seems to me that censorship pervades the Bahai Faith so thoroughly that some Bahais regularly use it as a method of intimidation and silencing of anyone with an unconventional opinion by accusing the individual of being a covenant breaker. This tactic was used against me by at least three Bahais during the discussion period for talk.religion.bahai and tacitly condoned by the moderators and others. I include, at the end, a threatening, coercive email message I received on March 27, 1997, from Mr. Hoda Mahmoudi, Auxiliary Board Member for Michigan, at a crucial juncture of the discussion and voting for talk.religion.bahai and would like an explanation of his motives. I, and perhaps the rest of the world, would greatly appreciate evidence that there are not now nine ayatollahs residing in Israel on Mt Carmel. Respectfully, Frederick Glaysher ------------- bahai- Two Messages to bahai Taliban --------------------------------------------------------------- This file contains two messages: "to uhj 12-10-99," "to uhj 7-24-1998": From: Patrick Henry Subject: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 8:33 AM Given the uhj's oppressive tactics and violation of the human rights of Linda and John Walbridge, Stephen Scholl, other editors of the Dialogue magazine, the Bahai Encyclopedia editors who resigned in protest, David Langness, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Nima Hazini, former Assistant to the Auxiliary Board Paul Dodenhoff who resigned, and so on, and so on, and so on.... All the victims documented on my website.... I hesitate to put the uhj above any reprehensible act.... including conspiracy to murder Dr. Daniel Jordan. I have been a member of the Bahai faith since 1976. My ID Card may be found on my website. I have never been contacted by the uhj or any of its underlings to the contrary. Anything I have ever said is a matter of the sanctity of my individual God-given conscience that both Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha claimed would never be violated in their religion. I shall "cc" this message to the uhj so that they hear from me directly on the matter. I would consider it an honor to be one of its official victims; indeed, the highest spiritual achievement of my Bahai life, defending Baha'u'llah'sTeachings from the fanaticism that has overwhelmed and hamstrung his Revelation. -- Frederick Glaysher.... "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Confirmation of receipt by the uhj of the message above.)From: Incoming Electronic Communication Operations Subject: Your Message Has Been Received... Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 5:36 AM Dear Friend, This is an automated acknowledgement. Your message regarding: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed has been received at the Baha'i World Centre. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patrick Henry patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than ayear and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with thecollusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BCCAmenu.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Further details on Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Mahmoudi.htm David Langness on Hoda Mahmoudi https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm Paul Dodenhoff on Mahmoudi https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb95.htm -------- >Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:45:46 -0500 >To: FG@hotmail.com >From: Hoda Mahmoudi >Dear Mr. Glaysher: > >I have been reading your e-mail postings recently. I would like to speak >with you by phone about some of your throughts and opinions regarding >matters relevant to the Baha'i Faith. As an Auxiliary Board members for >Michigan, I am always interested in issues which relate to individual >spiritual responsibility and the Baha'i Faith's principle of unity. My >phone number is 616/789-0590. > >Hope to hear from you soon. > >Hoda > > > > > >Hoda Mahmoudi, Ph.D. >Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs >Olivet College >Olivet, MI 49076 >616/749-7614 --------------------------------------------------------------- This file contains two messages: "to uhj 12-10-99," "to uhj 7-24-1998": From: Patrick Henry Subject: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 8:33 AM Given the uhj's oppressive tactics and violation of the human rights of Linda and John Walbridge, Stephen Scholl, other editors of the Dialogue magazine, the Bahai Encyclopedia editors who resigned in protest, David Langness, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Nima Hazini, former Assistant to the Auxiliary Board Paul Dodenhoff who resigned, and so on, and so on, and so on.... All the victims documented on my website.... I hesitate to put the uhj above any reprehensible act.... including conspiracy to murder Dr. Daniel Jordan. I have been a member of the Bahai faith since 1976. My ID Card may be found on my website. I have never been contacted by the uhj or any of its underlings to the contrary. Anything I have ever said is a matter of the sanctity of my individual God-given conscience that both Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha claimed would never be violated in their religion. I shall "cc" this message to the uhj so that they hear from me directly on the matter. I would consider it an honor to be one of its official victims; indeed, the highest spiritual achievement of my Bahai life, defending Baha'u'llah'sTeachings from the fanaticism that has overwhelmed and hamstrung his Revelation. -- Frederick Glaysher.... "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Confirmation of receipt by the uhj of the message above.)From: Incoming Electronic Communication Operations Subject: Your Message Has Been Received... Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 5:36 AM Dear Friend, This is an automated acknowledgement. Your message regarding: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed has been received at the Baha'i World Centre. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patrick Henry patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than ayear and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with thecollusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BCCAmenu.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:48 AM Subject: BeliefNet - Re: Some historical background on the "Tablet to Kohli" "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:aakphj$blik0$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > It appears that momentous events are taking place over on Beliefnet. > Not only is it the most outrageous place, yes even worse than Bahai > 'review' (wink! wink! nudge! nudge!), for censorship of posts, with > crowds of "moaning minnie" whinging fundies, even more excrutiatingly > nauseous than the worst ones here.... I believe you're quite right about BeliefNet. Beliefnet's "moderator," Cheryl Fuller, has proven herself in my opinion to be quite dishonest in her handling of matters and has clearly taken sides with the fundamentalists.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 9:31 AM Subject: Re: "fundamentalist Bah??" and other oxymorons Nima, I can't thank you enough for posting this one!!! Cf. Douglas Martin with Abdul-Baha: Abdul-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. *** Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- "Today we have closed our eyes to every righteous act and have sacrificed the abiding happiness of society to our own transitory profit. We regard fanaticism and zealotry as redounding to our credit and honor, and not content with this, we denounce one another and plot each other's ruin, and whenever we wish to put on a show of wisdom and learning, of virtue and godliness, we set about mocking and reviling this one and that. "The ideas of such a one," we say, "are wide of the mark, and so-and-so's behavior leaves much to be desired. The religious observances of Zayd are few and far between, and Amr is not firm in his faith."...With words such as these they assualt the minds of the helpless masses and disturb the hearts of the already bewildered poor, who know nothing of the true state of affairs and the real basis for such talk and remain completely unaware of the fact that a thousand selfish purposes are concealed behind the supposedly religious eloquence of certain individuals. They imagine that speakers of this type are motivated by virtuous zeal, when the truth is that such individuals keep up a great hue and cry because they see their own personal ruin in the welfare of the masses, and believe that if the people's eyes are opened their own light will go out. Abdul-Baha, The Secret of Divine Civilization, 56-57, 1990 edition. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another. [SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people [TAB p. 492] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- [Italics added] `Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart s relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$48khvg$j7l1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Hey Dave, > > I didn't make the following up, but one of your looney leaders did. And you > have the gaul to accuse me of making stuff up out of hatred! This statement > is an unequivocal statement of pure religious fascism. Read it and weep, > > > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > Faith." -Doug Martin > > -- > Freethought110 > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 11:37 AM Subject: uhj member on INDIVIDUAL CONSCIENCE - "abhorrent to the Teachings" IT CAN'T GET MUCH CLEARER THAN THIS: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 11:48 AM Subject: Re: Terrorism :: Baha'i View Abdul-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. *** Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Today we have closed our eyes to every righteous act and have sacrificed the abiding happiness of society to our own transitory profit. We regard fanaticism and zealotry as redounding to our credit and honor, and not content with this, we denounce one another and plot each other's ruin, and whenever we wish to put on a show of wisdom and learning, of virtue and godliness, we set about mocking and reviling this one and that. "The ideas of such a one," we say, "are wide of the mark, and so-and-so's behavior leaves much to be desired. The religious observances of Zayd are few and far between, and Amr is not firm in his faith."...With words such as these they assualt the minds of the helpless masses and disturb the hearts of the already bewildered poor, who know nothing of the true state of affairs and the real basis for such talk and remain completely unaware of the fact that a thousand selfish purposes are concealed behind the supposedly religious eloquence of certain individuals. They imagine that speakers of this type are motivated by virtuous zeal, when the truth is that such individuals keep up a great hue and cry because they see their own personal ruin in the welfare of the masses, and believe that if the people's eyes are opened their own light will go out. Abdul-Baha, The Secret of Divine Civilization, 56-57, 1990 edition. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another. [SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people [TAB p. 492] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Italics added] `Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart s relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. ------- Compare Abdu'l-Baha with what a member of the uhj has to say on conscience: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:92%z8.4682$TW.114059@news1.telusplanet.net... Bombs planted in parked cars explode near crowded market-places. Trucks loaded with explosives, driven by suicide bombers, crash through barriers into embassies and wreak devastation. Kidnappers abuse and manipulate the innocent. The nerve gas sarin is released in a subway station of a huge city, resulting in agonizing deaths and widespread casualties. Airplanes are hijacked and passengers are threatened with violence or death if the hijackers' demands are not met. These and similar events have occurred with such frequency in recent decades that one writer has speculated that terrorism could become "the incendiary torch and the devastating storm of the coming century."1 Indeed, the rise of the power and reach of terrorist threats throughout the twentieth century ranks as one of the most unsettling developments of current times. What, if anything, can be done about this pernicious and multidimensional phenomenon, with its many global ramifications? A clear definition of the problem would aid in the formulation of appropriate and effective plans to combat it. Terrorism has been described as "a special kind of violence designed to create a climate of fear among a wider target group than the immediate victims, usually for political ends,"2 and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation defines it as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." But while many definitions have been advanced, none has proven universally satisfactory. Such violence may be seen as both "a special kind" and "unlawful" by internationally accepted standards, but, depending on particular political affiliations and aspirations, one nation's "terrorist" may be another's "freedom fighter" and the terrorist's actions, rather than regarded as reprehensible, are justified as part of the heroic struggle for a noble cause. As long as governments or their peoples hide behind such rhetoric and countenance such actions, effective international response will remain beyond reach. In the meantime, the need to address the issue has become increasingly urgent as terrorists' actions generate wider and wider destruction. Their motives are often complex and sometimes unclear, but political theorist CJM Drake has identified separatism, religion, liberalism, anarchism, communism, conservatism, fascism, specific single issues, and/or organized crime as the most common ideologies embraced by contemporary terrorists.3 Commitment to such ideologies enables the "true believers" to dehumanize their targets and transform them into representative symbols. Ideology also provides a measure by which terrorists can easily identify "enemies" and determine the relative "innocence" or "guilt" of people and organizations. This, Drake says, allows them to identify particular people and things as "legitimate targets."4 Such targets include business, industry, various government facilities, and civilians who happen to be in the vicinity. Paul Wilkinson, of the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at St. Andrews University, Scotland, describes a trend towards "massive car and truck bombings in crowded city areas and 'spectacular' terrorist attacks, for example, on civil aviation, airport facilities or military or diplomatic facilities.. ."5 Overall objectives generally extend well beyond destruction of immediate targets, however. Terrorists' acts are designed to shock, to outrage, and to provide leverage for perpetrators' demands. Wilkinson lists the following as characteristic objectives: massive and immediate publicity as a result of an outrage or a series of atrocities; to inspire followers and sympathizers to further acts of terrorism or insurrection; to provoke the authorities into repressive over-reaction which the terrorists can then exploit to their political advantage; as a means of extortion to force the authorities into making concessions, such as the release of imprisoned terrorists or the payment of ransoms; to sow inter-communal hatred and conflict; to destroy public confidence in government and security agencies; and to coerce communities and activists into obeying the terrorist leadership.6 As more and more of the world's nation-states operate on a commonly understood platform of conduct, bound together-albeit imperfectly-by international conventions, treaties, and other kinds of protocols, terrorists know basically what kind of behavior to expect from their targets and what they mayor may not expect from them in retaliation. With such widely accepted standards, terrorists possess perhaps the greatest weapon of all: the ability to create a climate of fear and to intimidate and/or coerce others on a wider scale than ever before in history. And terrorist acts have a disproportionate impact. While only a handful of people perished in Aum Shinri Kyo's sarin attack on the Tokyo subway system in 1995, for example, the entire population of the city-and the country-was terrified at the thought that if this had occurred in one subway station, there was no telling when and where it might happen again. Similar fear could easily be generated through media reports of the release of even a small amount of biological or chemical toxins almost anywhere in the world, even though the actual efficacy of such attacks has so far been limited by inadequate delivery mechanisms. While the popular notion is that terrorism is a recent phenomenon, experts are quick to point out that it has a long history, reaching back at least to Biblical times. Secret societies in China and India also engaged in violence to achieve political ends-activity that, in various guises and in support of various causes, can be traced throughout history.7 The end of the nineteenth century was perhaps one of the "high points" in this long chronology. With the assassinations of a number of European leaders, including members of royalty and the US president, "it seemed no one was safe from terrorist attack." Walter Laqueur writes, "Terrorism became the leading preoccupation of politicians, police chiefs, journalists, and writers from Dostoevsky to Henry James. If in the year 1900 the leaders of the main industrial powers had assembled, most of them would have insisted on giving terrorism top priority on their agenda..."8 Terrorism has continued to flourish during the twentieth century, leaving almost no area of the world untouched. It has been used as a tool by both left- and right-wing causes and by groups of every conceivable stripe-anarchists, fascists, nationalists seeking independence, communists, extra-legal militias, and eco-terrorists-in places ranging from Europe to Asia, from South America to the Middle East, from the US to Africa.9 One alarming recent development, noted by former US ambassador for Counter-Terrorism Paul Bremer in 1995, is the evolution of "a new form of decentralized, religion-motivated terrorism."10 Other writers, too, have remarked that religion and nationalism have combined to become a powerful motivating force for contemporary acts of terror. One has noted, for example, that in 1968 there were no identifiable religious terrorist groups, while by the early 1990s almost one quarter of the world's active terrorist groups were motivated by their religious beliefs. The number of terrorist acts committed by such groups has risen sharply since 1988; they are estimated to be responsible for more than half of the 64,319 recorded incidents that occurred between 1970 and 1995.11 Terrorism has been called the poor man's way to wage war. While less affluent states are reluctant to be drawn into conflicts, some have found that they can best pursue their objectives by sponsoring terrorist activities. However, the inherent risks of such state-sponsored terrorism (terrorists turning on their hosts, for example) and actions by the international community, including diplomatic and economic sanctions, have worked to isolate state sponsors of terrorism. A few "rogue states" still do harbor terrorists, but the number of such havens is dwindling. While experts generally agree that state-sponsored terrorism is in decline, the number of transnational terrorist networks is proliferating-a development related to the upsurge in religiously motivated terrorism. The Report of the National Commission on Terrorism to the 105th US Congress (1997-98) noted, for example, that "today's terrorists...are...forming loose, transnational affiliations based on religious or ideological affinity and a common hatred of the United States."12 The detection and prevention of attacks carried out by such networks is very difficult. The development of global communications systems and of I technology that allows the production of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, radioactive, chemical, and biological weapons, has provided terrorists with access to more powerful tools than they have ever had at their disposal. Coupled with this, the destabilization of various governments and a general sense of social, political, economic, cultural, psychological, and spiritual crisis in the world have given them fertile new ground in which to flourish. The fragmentation of the world in the years since the end of the Cold War and widespread fear of globalization have radicalized various groups, and, in the words of one writer: The uncertainty and unpredictability in the present environment as the world searches for a new world order, amidst an increasingly complex global environment with ethnic and nationalist conflicts, provides many religious terrorist groups with the opportunity and ammunition to shape history according to their divine duty, cause, and mandate while it indicates for others that the end of time itself is near.13 Some commentators, however, offer a more prosaic explanation. In the particular case of the Arab world, for example, Fouad Ajami writes: We have looked to the heavens, and we have looked in the scripture, for explanations for the appeal of political Islam. We have spent a generation speaking of "Islamic fundamentalism," of that theocratic force that has come into Arab life. But the truth lies in material circumstances. Theocratic politics blew in when economic growth faltered... When a deep recession hit in the mid-1980s, due to the fall of oil prices, a politics of panic and resentment overtook the newly urbanized and newly prosperous. ..In the cities and in the no man's land trapped by the recession, the newly urbanized were strangers living on their nerves. Their children were available to the politics of millenarianism and tunnoil.14 The ascendancy of the United States-the so-called Great Satan-as the world's sole superpower has given focus to fundamentalist Islamic groups. The resentment of Western prosperity and the perceived threat of secularization, combined with the influence of charismatic, militant clerical leaders, has provided a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. Most Muslim terrorists, who are young, single men, have grown up in what they perceive as a climate of social injustice, oppressed by the Western powers, and the religious fervor-or fanaticism-that moves them is cultivated in the schools that they attend. Their education promotes a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam and emphasizes the duty of the individual to engage in "jihad." While some Islamic scholars interpret "jihad" primarily as "the righteous struggle" within the individual between the good and darker forces operating within the self, fundamentalists emphasize the interpretation of the term as struggle in a military sense, in which the "true faith" does battle against satanic forces (e.g. Western civilization with its "corrupt values" and "imperialism," the state of Israel, or other targeted groups). The vision that these young men acquire through their schooling provides them with an alternative to submission to the modern, secular forces they see not only as causing their own oppression but also as perpetrating evil throughout the entire world. An act against even one small element of those forces then becomes holy, virtuous. Death-even suicide-for such a cause is martyrdom. Their objective, as Paul Bremer writes, is "not a shift in American policy but the destruction of American society."15 Terrorists have sometimes been depicted as "idealistic and courageous young people, patriots and social revolutionaries, driven by intolerable conditions, by oppression and tyranny, to undertake desperate actions." But more than one writer has credited fanaticism, indiscriminate murder, and sheer aggression as the motive force behind contemporary terrorist acts. This kind of "apocalyptic nihilism" represents a pure urge to destroy-terror for solely terror's sake.16 -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net >> World Watch ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 3:39 PM Subject: Re: uhj member on INDIVIDUAL CONSCIENCE - "abhorrent to the Teachings" Christianity NEVER has claimed that the individual conscience is SUPREME, nor has any legitimate representative form of Western governement, only the demagogue on the uhj named Doug Martin.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aarq2u$d0snr$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > IT CAN'T GET MUCH CLEARER THAN THIS: > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") > > Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 5:59 AM Subject: Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$0mbivg$hwl1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Well, Fred, lest the fundies ever accuse any of us of making things up, this > quote as you say doesn't get any clearer as to who exactly is making what > up. Doug Martin is clearly overruling Baha'u'llah himself this time. Is > there any doubt now that the hardliners are attempting to throw a veil of > religious fascism upon the Baha'i religion? With this quote it doesn't get > any clearer! I definitely agree. If you read the passage the quotation is from it's interesting that Martin places so much emphasis on the Bab, which makes perfect sense for justifying a fundamentalist agenda.... I had thought Juan Cole must have been at times exaggerating a little about Doug Martin's fanaticism. I stand corrected. Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 6:56 AM Subject: Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:07 AM Subject: UN &: Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member Compare Doug Martin on UN: In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "UN" match case) And regarding, Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm See then my two messages on the bahai faith & the UN: uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin and his views.... Ask yourself, does the UN know the record of the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its own ranks? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aatu08$dkdcf$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. > Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html > (Edit>Find > "conscience") > > Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 > Doug Martin, uhj member > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm > > Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:10 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member One other important piece of evidence: Bahai international community Abuses its Access to UN MF Mailing List 4/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/OneCountry.htm Note especially at the end that the bic abused its control of MFDiscuss@yahoo.com to suppress my posting to it. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aatul7$d1jna$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > Compare Doug Martin on UN: > > In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's > issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial > Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community > was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at > the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so. > Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html > (Edit>Find > "UN" match case) > > And regarding, Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from > Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm > > See then my two messages on the bahai faith & the UN: > > uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm > > Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm > > After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the > influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin and his > views.... Ask yourself, does the UN know the record of > the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its > own ranks? > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:aatu08$dkdcf$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: > > > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions > or > > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent > to > > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > > Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. > > Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html > > (Edit>Find > "conscience") > > > > Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 > > Doug Martin, uhj member > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm > > > > Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > > > Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:47 AM Subject: bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UNmenu.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship To understand the influence of the bahai faith on the United Nations, I suggest the reader might find it helpful to consider these documents in the following order: Doug Martin, member of the bahai universal house of justice on the United Nations: "In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so." {If interested in reading full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "UN" match case, several clicks into it)} Cf. Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm See then my messages on the bahai faith & the UN: uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm Bahai international community Abuses its Access to UN MF Mailing List 4/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/OneCountry.htm Note especially at the end that the bic abused its control over MFDiscuss@yahoo.com in order to suppress my informing other Forum members of its abuse. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin who holds such a fundamentalist interpretation of the bahai faith. Does the UN know the record of the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its own ranks? I would find it very worrisome if it does. My guess is that bahais at the UN, such as Techeste Ahderom, co-chair of the Millennium Forum and the principal bahai representative to the United Nations, dismiss concerns whenever they are raised by anyone within the Organization, essentially participating in deception. Brief History of Douglas Martin Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 8:21 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... Compare the moderation of Abdu'l-Baha to the fanaticism of Doug Martin and other fundamentalists among my fellow bahais: Abdul-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. *** Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- "Today we have closed our eyes to every righteous act and have sacrificed the abiding happiness of society to our own transitory profit. We regard fanaticism and zealotry as redounding to our credit and honor, and not content with this, we denounce one another and plot each other's ruin, and whenever we wish to put on a show of wisdom and learning, of virtue and godliness, we set about mocking and reviling this one and that. "The ideas of such a one," we say, "are wide of the mark, and so-and-so's behavior leaves much to be desired. The religious observances of Zayd are few and far between, and Amr is not firm in his faith."...With words such as these they assualt the minds of the helpless masses and disturb the hearts of the already bewildered poor, who know nothing of the true state of affairs and the real basis for such talk and remain completely unaware of the fact that a thousand selfish purposes are concealed behind the supposedly religious eloquence of certain individuals. They imagine that speakers of this type are motivated by virtuous zeal, when the truth is that such individuals keep up a great hue and cry because they see their own personal ruin in the welfare of the masses, and believe that if the people's eyes are opened their own light will go out. Abdul-Baha, The Secret of Divine Civilization, 56-57, 1990 edition. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another. [SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendancy over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people [TAB p. 492] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- [Italics added] `Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart s relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. Compare John Winthrop on Liberty ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Compare Abdu'l-Baha with what a member of the uhj has to say on conscience: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 8:27 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... Ah, yes, plausible denial - the tyrant's subterfuge.... Compare Abdu'l-Baha with what a member of the uhj has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Member of the uhj: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Jordan Rager" wrote in message news:ab03cc$a1u$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > I think the key to Mr. Sylvester's point is that he is paraphrasing > sections of Mr. Martin's talk and that nothing has been transcribed > verbatim. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 5:48 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... bahai - Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists Having observed the tactics of bahai fundamentalists for over twenty-five years, I've learnt a few things about the way they operate: 1. Always Slander, Demonize, Discredit, Shun, Ad Hominem, Smear, Scapegoat, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Silence, Harass, etc., etc., the individual.... All of which has become known as "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm 2. Lure into supposed discussion then cut the jugular. 3. Work together to create the perception for uninformed non-bahais that the individual in question is unbalanced, aberrant, "spamming," a liar, crazy, disgruntled, reprobate, etc.... 4. Change or ignore the subject by shifting to the past and arguing over who said what, when, where, how, etc.... As long as the uhj uses the "temporary measure" of "review," for over 80 years now, to suppress all free thought and discussion and encourages such unseemly tactics, attempting to discuss anything with them is simply a waste of time and energy. Many people other than myself have noted "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm Nobody has to read my reposts who has done so already. My Message Rules are full of bahai fundamentalists. Others may use the same technology to filter out my reposts. My reposts are intended for the uninformed and naive, exactly what enrages the extremists among my fellow bahais. Anyone interested in my views may read them in my archives or glean them from my reposts, which, in my view, preserve the historical record of how deceitful bahai fanatics have been and are willing to go.... I can only hope by serving humbly, as the self-appointed archivist/historian for talk.religion.bahai and for all the many victims of the "universal" house of "justice," that someday someone will come along who will dig deep enough into the record so that the truth will begin to surface. Impartial nonbahai observers might wish to compare and decide for themselves whether the picture fundamentalists labor so hard to paint of me is accurate or not: https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm And then ask yourself why would they go to such extremes? What is it they don't want you to know? I submit the answers may be found on my bahai website. It is my hope that the distortions of the uhj will begin to be purged, it will gradually reform itself, acknowledging the broad and liberal Teachings of Baha'u'llah that it has suppressed now for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ "Jordan Rager" wrote in message news:ab40bs$e0n$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > Look: Mr. Martin did not say those words, so why quote him as doing such? > Find out what exactly he has said and then argue with that. No one is trying > to dodge a bullet here. I just think it is silly to hold a man to words that > do not belong to him. Moreover, I think it is wrong to slander an individual > or a body. Why do you consistently try to defame and malign the Universal > House of Justice? What part of the covenant did you opt out of when you > professed your belief in it initially? > > I do not believe that this is the way to assist the Cause of God, which is > what I assume you are trying to do. What would tyrants in the Baha'i Faith > have to gain by such behaviour? Notoriety? (among six million people, 99% > percent of whom likely can't name a single individual on the House, and > whose works are published without individual authorship). Posterity? (in a > world whose worth is "as much as the black in the eye of a dead ant" > (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 56)). I think not, but am > curious as to what you think they have to benefit from being tyrannical. > > jordan rager > > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:ab0nmm$eabh7$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Ah, yes, plausible denial - the tyrant's subterfuge.... > > > > Compare Abdu'l-Baha with what a member of the uhj has to say on > conscience: > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > > > Member of the uhj: > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions > or > > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent > to > > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > > Faith." -Doug Martin > > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > > "conscience") > > > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > "Jordan Rager" wrote in message > > news:ab03cc$a1u$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > > > I think the key to Mr. Sylvester's point is that he is paraphrasing > > > sections of Mr. Martin's talk and that nothing has been transcribed > > > verbatim. > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 5:57 AM Subject: "A dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$k76ovg$99r1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Well, then, put your money where your mouth is and find out if Doug Martin > said this bullshit! As far as I am concerned, it is a direct quote. > Furthermore, Ron House has verified that Peter Khan has expressed the same > sort of statement to him directly. So the onus is firmly on *you* guys to > prove that Martin and co have not made such statements when clearly there is > corroborative evidence on several instances that they have. So, Kohli, show > me it's bullshit, don't tell me it's bullshit ;-) > I heard Firuz Khazemzadeh, member of the USA nsa say something similar in Phoenix at a bahai conference in 1991 or '92. Anyone who is an honest person and a bahai (the two don't always go together) should be able to recall numerous occasions at bahai-only events when such things have been intimated. Compare member of the uhj: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 5:59 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "a dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:bipB8.12961$n3.9770@nwrddc01.gnilink.net... > Do you have a statement from Martin that disavows this quote? If not then > tough luck, he is pretty much stuck with this quote on his back. Maybe he > would like to take it back now? Feel free to directly quote him on this > subject. Here's the quotation: member of the uhj: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > "conscience") -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 6:44 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... = "dangerous delusion from Christianity" - Excerpts from "The Bahai Technique" Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan, Department of History, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB [Covenant Breaker (heretic)] to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket. Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" Cole10.htm Professor Juan Cole, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all). Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith. The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent. With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them. This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute. Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cole71.htm Excerpts from "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Jordan Rager" wrote in message news:ab40bs$e0n$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > Look: Mr. Martin did not say those words, so why quote him as doing such? > Find out what exactly he has said and then argue with that. No one is trying > to dodge a bullet here. I just think it is silly to hold a man to words that > do not belong to him. Moreover, I think it is wrong to slander an individual > or a body. Why do you consistently try to defame and malign the Universal > House of Justice? What part of the covenant did you opt out of when you > professed your belief in it initially? > > I do not believe that this is the way to assist the Cause of God, which is > what I assume you are trying to do. What would tyrants in the Baha'i Faith > have to gain by such behaviour? Notoriety? (among six million people, 99% > percent of whom likely can't name a single individual on the House, and > whose works are published without individual authorship). Posterity? (in a > world whose worth is "as much as the black in the eye of a dead ant" > (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 56)). I think not, but am > curious as to what you think they have to benefit from being tyrannical. > > jordan rager > > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:ab0nmm$eabh7$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Ah, yes, plausible denial - the tyrant's subterfuge.... > > > > Compare Abdu'l-Baha with what a member of the uhj has to say on > conscience: > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > > > Member of the uhj: > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions > or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > > Faith." -Doug Martin > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > > "conscience") > > > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 10:26 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "dangerous delusion from Christianity" Thank you, Karen, for finding such illuminating passages. We all have heard these things stated or intimated in bahai meetings many times but the fundamentalists have been careful to hide their true beliefs from the public eye and new bahais. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:udd3787ql6j0f3@corp.supernews.com... > > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > Randy Burns wrote in message > news:bipB8.12961$n3.9770@nwrddc01.gnilink.net... > > Do you have a statement from Martin that disavows this quote? If not then > > tough luck, he is pretty much stuck with this quote on his back. Maybe he > > would like to take it back now? Feel free to directly quote him on this > > subject. > > Dear Randy, > > This isn't an idea that Martin just recently came up with; he's been saying > it for years. > > I found this in that little series called "The Power of the Covenant" > publishedby the NSA of > Canada in 1977. The authors were Douglas Martin, Peter Khan, and Jane > Faily. This idea connecting Christianity with the belief in individual > conscience is repeated in Part 3: The Face of Opposition, on page 28. It > says that the Christian idea of the Holy Spirit allows every individual to > claim inspiration and therefore, opens the door to sectarianism. The passage > continues: > > "The result was to create in the minds of most Christians a vague > assumption that, when the individual prays directly to God, he receives > guidance through his private conscience. Many times, the promptings of > conscience contradict the apparent meaning of Christian scriptures (as in > the case of St. Paul's statements on celibacy) or the explicit teachings of > a particular church (as with race relationships). Increasingly, however, > it is conscience which is regarded as the reliable guide, a guide which has > no objective check on it." > > Even more striking on p. 30: > > "This system of belief has had many admirable results in the individual > spiritual life. Its unrestrained influence on social history, however, > reveals many limitations. It permitted the growth of the conviction not > only that personal conscience is the ultimate authority in life, but also > that personal freedom is the highest good. The rise of a democratic > political philosophy and democratic processes in the West gave the final > blessing to this doctrine of individualism. "Christianity" and "Democracy" > in time blended in the public mind as one vaguely defined, but immensely > influential popular cult of individualism, embracing people of all > religious denominations. Such a cult differs in several important ways > from the Teachings of Baha'u'llah". > > While, of course, this is not a direct quote from Martin himself, and he was > not the only author here, the similarity to the notes taken from his talk > pretty strongly suggests that this is, indeed, his attitude about > Christianity, Democracy, and the conscience of the individual. And the fact > that this came out in an official publication of the NSA carries some > weight -- this was part of an effort to deepen people on the Covenant, so > presumably it reflects what they think is "correct" Baha'i teaching. There > have also been remarks in more recent UHJ letters disparaging the role of > individual conscience. > > Love, Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > > > > > Cheers, Randy > > > > -- > > > > Jordan Rager wrote in message > > news:ab40bs$e0n$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > > > Look: Mr. Martin did not say those words, so why quote him as doing > such? > > > Find out what exactly he has said and then argue with that. No one is > > trying > > > to dodge a bullet here. I just think it is silly to hold a man to words > > that > > > do not belong to him. Moreover, I think it is wrong to slander an > > individual > > > or a body. Why do you consistently try to defame and malign the > Universal > > > House of Justice? What part of the covenant did you opt out of when you > > > professed your belief in it initially? > > > > > > > > > > > Member of the uhj: > > > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > > > > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the > > end, > > > > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > > > > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal > convictions > > > or > > > > opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is > equivalent > > > to > > > > "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > > > > Faith." -Doug Martin > > > > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Find > > > > "conscience") > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > "Jordan Rager" wrote in message > > > > news:ab03cc$a1u$1@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca... > > > > > I think the key to Mr. Sylvester's point is that he is paraphrasing > > > > > sections of Mr. Martin's talk and that nothing has been transcribed > > > > > verbatim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 10:35 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:udd3787ql6j0f3@corp.supernews.com... > > There have also been remarks in more recent UHJ letters disparaging >the role of individual conscience. Karen, When you have a chance, could you quote those disparaging uhj letters? I'm sure I would not be alone in finding them interesting. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 4:18 PM Subject: John Milton on the "grim Woolf" - Lycidas [St. Peter, the pilot of Christ's boat] Last came, and last did go, The Pilot of the Galilean lake, 110 Two massy Keyes he bore of metals twain, (The Golden opes, the Iron shuts amain) He shook his Miter'd locks, and stern bespake, How well could I have spar'd for thee young swain, Anow of such as for their bellies sake, 115 Creep and intrude, and climb into the fold? Of other care they little reck'ning make, Then how to scramble at the shearers feast, And shove away the worthy bidden guest. Blind mouthes! that scarce themselves know how to hold 120 A Sheep-hook, or have learn'd ought els the least That to the faithfull Herdmans art belongs! What recks it them? What need they? They are sped; And when they list, their lean and flashy songs Grate on their scrannel Pipes of wretched straw, 125 The hungry Sheep look up, and are not fed, But swoln with wind, and the rank mist they draw, Rot inwardly, and foul contagion spread: Besides what the grim Woolf with privy paw Daily devours apace, and nothing sed, 130 But that two-handed engine at the door, Stands ready to smite once, and smite no more. Excerpt from John Milton, Lycidas. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:28 AM Subject: 64. O OPPRESSORS OF EARTH! 64. O OPPRESSORS OF EARTH! Withdraw your hands from tyranny, for I have pledged Myself not to forgive any man's injustice. This is My covenant which I have irrevocably decreed in the preserved tablet and sealed it with My seal of glory. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Tyranny.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Justice.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:29 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying ******* Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty." [PUP p.52] https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:30 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when ******* [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." --Professor Juan Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:30 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "Suppression (that is what it was) of Dialogue magazine by ******** [ bahai ] "Suppression (that is what it was) of Dialogue magazine by [ bahai ] "Suppression (that is what it was) of Dialogue magazine by Kazemzadeh and Henderson." Professor Juan Cole, May 13, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole30.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:31 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "Shunning is the marker of a cult . . . note that these are all ********* [ bahai ] "Shunning is the marker of a cult . . . note that these are all [ bahai ] "Shunning is the marker of a cult . . . note that these are all relatively small cults and none of them will ever really amount to anything in mainstream society." "I think shunning is a human rights abuse. It may be legal (in non-tort situations), but then, lots of human rights abuses are legal. I don't see the difference between the Mafia organizing a conspiracy to have someone's restaurant boycotted unless he pays protection money, and a religious organization threatening to prevent someone from seeing his coreligionist relatives at reunions unless he is blindly obedient to them. Both are forms of coercion that invade privacy and detract from the autonomy and dignity of the individual." - Professor Juan Cole, February 12, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole54.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:32 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "These are the people who sent their man to my own home to ********* [ bahai ] "These are the people who sent their man to my own home to [ bahai ] "These are the people who sent their man to my own home to interrogate me and then had me (a well known professor of Middle East Studies at a major university!) threatened with being shunned unless I fell silent! If that isnt' the coercion of conscience then I don't know what is!" Professor Juan Cole, January 31, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole72.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:32 AM Subject: bahai - "That includes blowing the whistle on coercion, manipulation ********* bahai - "That includes blowing the whistle on coercion, manipulation bahai - "That includes blowing the whistle on coercion, manipulation and abuse by Baha'i administrators of innocent adherents. I plead for all right thinking and compassionate persons to join me in trying to reform the Baha'i administration by critiquing it. It is out of kilter. Its members know it is out of kilter. It needs to be righted. Kowtowing only keeps it out of kilter." Professor Juan Cole, October 12, 1998 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole19.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:33 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions ******** [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty , security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another,[SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people[TAB p. 492] https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:34 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - ******** [ bahai ] Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - [ bahai ] Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - "[To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. * * * Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án." A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:34 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by ********* [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan. Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:35 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, ********* [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise be to God!--this is a house of worship [Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912] wherein conscientious opinion has free sway. Every religion and every religious aspiration may be freely voiced and expressed here. Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought, likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable. Therefore, this is a blessed church because its pulpit is open to every religion, the ideals of which may be set forth with openness and freedom." The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but ********** [ bahai ] "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but [ bahai ] "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but also freedom of *speech* and a democratic society." Juan Cole, December 03, 1997 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Freedom2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - ******** [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found." --Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 7:09 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... DEFINITIONS OF.... "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:dX0C8.1359$Sh.667@nwrddc01.gnilink.net... > > But what is the self? and what is the conscience? Dictionary definition of > conscience: > > 1. the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of > one's own conduct... > > 2. a faculty, power or principle enjoining good acts > > Self: > > The entire person of an individual. > > etc. > > I would contend that the "self" quoted by Baha'u'llah is not the > "conscience" of Doug Martin. The conscience is a small part of the Self, > where does it come from, how is it created, why does Doug Martin want to > snuff it out? > > Hmmm, good questions. Randy, Thank you so much for bringing to my attention the necessity of carefully defining our terms. I wonder what dictionary you're using? Some of the older dictionaries have the clearest definitions on many matters of the soul. Noah Webster's 1858 edition: "Internal or self-knowledge, or judgment of right and wrong; or the faculty, power, or principle within us, which decides on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our own actions and affections, and instantly approves or condemns them. Conscience is called, by some writers, the *moral* sense, and considered as an original faculty of our nature." OED: "Inward knowledge, consciousness; inmost thought, mind. Internal conviction. Consciousness of right and wrong, moral sense. The sense of right and wrong as regards things for which one is responsible." Then there's Abdu'l-Baha: These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] "If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy...." Abdu'l-Baha, SAQ, 215 ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 7:18 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:fX0C8.1360$Sh.48@nwrddc01.gnilink.net... > Dear Karen > > I ask myself what Martin has against the individual conscience of man? It > seems to me that he wishes to deny the individual the right to even feel > himself guilty of an infraction without the approval of the Institutions. > Apparently to him no individual has the right to pronounce on his/her own > guilt, only a proper Baha'i Institution has that right. The individual will > lose all right of self identity in the Baha'i World Order, if Doug has his > way. Abdu'l-Baha: The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > > "The result was to create in the minds of most Christians a vague > > assumption that, when the individual prays directly to God, he receives > > guidance through his private conscience. Many times, the promptings of > > conscience contradict the apparent meaning of Christian scriptures (as in > > the case of St. Paul's statements on celibacy) or the explicit teachings > of > > a particular church (as with race relationships). Increasingly, however, > > it is conscience which is regarded as the reliable guide, a guide which > has > > no objective check on it." > > I have to think that our idea of conscience (as he mentions here as a > reliable guide to conduct) is a pretty modern idea, late 19th century > perhaps. But possible you could trace this back to Luther's idea of the > "priesthood of all believers." In fact the modern idea of individual > freedom is said to first appear during the Reformation (at least in the > modern sense). > > What Doug Martin is saying would remove from humanity the right to think for > him/her self, without the consent of society (or read Baha'i Institutions). Abdu'l-Baha: In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm > In general I think where individualism is implicit in Christianity is in the > idea that each Christian has a personal relationship with Jesus or God that > no one else can interfere with, but this personal relationship was not > something that ever caused the schisms or heresies in either the early days > or the latter days of that religion. I don't think this doctrine ever lead > to individual political freedoms or even religious freedoms of any kind. > > > "This system of belief has had many admirable results in the individual > > spiritual life. Its unrestrained influence on social history, however, > > reveals many limitations. It permitted the growth of the conviction not > > only that personal conscience is the ultimate authority in life, but also > > that personal freedom is the highest good. The rise of a democratic > > political philosophy and democratic processes in the West gave the final > > blessing to this doctrine of individualism. "Christianity" and "Democracy" > > in time blended in the public mind as one vaguely defined, but immensely > > influential popular cult of individualism, embracing people of all > > religious denominations. Such a cult differs in several important ways > > from the Teachings of Baha'u'llah". > > There may be a cult of "individualism" in Hollywood but I'm afraid it is not > something I've ever noticed combined with heavy duty Christianity of any > kind. > > What is intriguing is the general drift of the thoughts expressed here. Why > does the UHJ think that individualism is so bad? Baha'u'llah only condemned > extreme and outrageous behavior, He never condemns moderate and healthy > individualism or creativity. What is life without creativity? They have debased His Teachings into literal-minded fundamentalism that allows them to wield complete and absolute control over the individual, something which cannot be justified in the light of Baha'u'llah's own Writings. > Basically what Martin has always been after is a form of collectivism which > is pernicious to all humanity and is in complete opposition to the expressed > teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha. Exactly. I couldn't agree more. "soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:04 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... uhj's justification for coercion to Maneck..... Karen, I had thought perhaps you were aware of some other statement regarding conscience. The letter to Maneck you cite is her old rag from the uhj that she has regularly dredged up for years to justify their fanatical views and doesn't add anything new to the discussion. My comments on it below: "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:udhfrcstjgrib0@corp.supernews.com... > > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > Bahai Faith wrote in message > news:ab67ve$fnoat$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message > > news:udd3787ql6j0f3@corp.supernews.com... > > > > > > There have also been remarks in more recent UHJ letters disparaging > > >the role of individual conscience. > > > > Karen, > > > > When you have a chance, could you quote those disparaging uhj letters? > > > > I'm sure I would not be alone in finding them interesting. > > Dear Fred, > > I was thinking of the following passage from the Feb. 8, 1998 letter to > Susan Maneck, which I'm sure she has quoted here before. I'm including the > whole context -- one the on hand they uphold freedom of conscience, then on > the other speak about how limited it is. There is again, in this passage > the disparagement of Christianity that we saw in the other quotes mentioned > here. Basically, the only real "freedom" that Baha'is have is the freedom to > leave the Faith. > > Love, Karen > ****************** > This brings us to the specific points raised in your email of 17 November > 1997. As you well understand, not only the right but also the responsibility > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > Dr. Susan Stiles Maneck > U.S.A. 8 February 1998 > Page 3 > > ". . . of each believer to explore truth for himself or herself are > fundamental to the Baha'i teachings. This principle is an integral feature > of the coming of age of humankind, inseparable from the social > transformation to which Baha'u'llah is calling the peoples of the world. It > is as relevant to specifically scholarly activity as it is to the rest of > spiritual and intellectual life. Every human being is ultimately responsible > to God for the use which he or she makes of these possibilities; conscience > is never to be coerced, whether by other individuals or institutions. So false, given the uhj's incessant harassment and coercion of conscience, Dialogue, Cole, McKenny, Marshall, et al.... The double speak of a tyrant.... > Conscience, however, is not an unchangeable absolute. One dictionary > definition, although not covering all the usages of the term, presents the > common understanding of the word "conscience" as "the sense of right and > wrong as regards things for which one is responsible; the faculty or > principle which pronounces upon the moral quality of one's actions or > motives, approving the right and condemning the wrong". > > The functioning of one's conscience, then, depends upon one's > understanding of right and wrong; the conscience of one person may be > established upon a disinterested striving after truth and justice, while > that of another may rest on an unthinking predisposition to act in > accordance with that pattern of standards, principles and prohibitions which > is a product of his social environment. Conscience, therefore, can serve > either as a bulwark of an upright character or can represent an accumulation > of prejudices learned from one's forebears or absorbed from a limited social > code. Rather, "an accumulation of prejudices learned from" one's fellow fundamentalists, from the "limited social code" current among aparatchiks in Haifa, Wilmette, and elsewhere.... And no member of the Bahai Faith may speak up and say without the wrath of the power-hungry coming down on him or her.... More despicable double speak.... > A Baha'i recognizes that one aspect of his spiritual and intellectual > growth is to foster the development of his conscience in the light of divine > Revelation -- a Revelation which, in addition to providing a wealth of > spiritual and ethical principles, exhorts man "to free himself from idle > fancy and imitation, discern with the eye of oneness His glorious handiwork, > and look into all things with a searching eye". This process of development, > therefore, involves a clear-sighted examination of the conditions of the > world with both heart and mind. A Baha'i will understand that an upright > life is based upon observance of certain principles which stem from Divine > Revelation and which he recognizes as essential for the well-being of both > the individual and society. In order to uphold such principles, he knows > that, in certain cases, the voluntary submission of the promptings of his > own personal conscience to the decision of the majority is a conscientious > requirement, as in wholeheartedly accepting the majority decision of an > Assembly at the outcome of consultation. The majority can be wrong, secular or religious, or any combination thereof. Much of civilization has learned the bitter lesson of caution when assuming the majority knows best but not the tyrants who ride Carmel, digging their spurs into the souls of Baha'u'llah's subjects.... > In the discussion of wisdom in your email of 21 September 1997, you > observe that maybe "Baha'i academics all too often have not recognized that > to a great extent failure to exercise wisdom represents a failure of love." > The House of Justice agrees that the exercise of wisdom calls for a measure > of love and the development of a sensitive conscience. These, in turn, > involve not only devotion to a high standard of uprightness, but also > consideration of the effects of one's words and actions. > > A Baha'i's duty to pursue an unfettered search after truth should lead > him to understand the Teachings as an organic, logically coherent whole, > should cause him to examine his own ideas and motives, and should enable him > to see > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > Dr. Susan Stiles Maneck > U.S.A. 8 February 1998 > Page 4 > > that adherence to the Covenant, to which he is a party, is not blind > imitation but conscious choice, freely made and freely followed. "The Covenant": I.e., their literal, intolerant, hateful interpretation of it, which they wield to coerce and silence anyone who reveres Abdu'l-Baha's unequivocal respect for moderate and sensible freedom of conscience. > In many of His utterances, `Abdu'l-Baha extols governments which uphold > freedom of conscience for their citizens. As can be seen from the context, > these statements refer to the freedom to follow the religion of one's > choice. In the original of a passage to which you refer in your email of 17 > November 1997, He gives the following analysis of freedom. > > > There are three types of freedom. The first is divine freedom, which is > one of the inherent attributes of the Creator for He is unconstrained in His > will, and no one can force Him to change His decree in any matter > whatsoever.... > The second is the political freedom of Europeans, which leaves the > individual free to do whatsoever he desires as long as his action does not > harm his neighbour. This is natural freedom, and its greatest expression is > seen in the animal world. Observe these birds and notice with what freedom > they live. However much man may try, he can never be as free as an animal, > because the existence of order acts as an impediment to freedom. > > The third freedom is that which is born of obedience to the laws and > ordinances of the Almighty. This is the freedom of the human world, where > man severs his affections from all things. When he does so, he becomes > immune to all hardship and sorrow. Wealth or material power will not deflect > him from moderation and fairness, neither will poverty or need inhibit him > from showing forth happiness and tranquillity. The more the conscience of > man develops, the more will his heart be free and his soul attain unto > happiness. In the religion of God, there is freedom of thought because God, > alone, controls the human conscience, but this freedom should not go beyond > courtesy. In the religion of God, there is no freedom of action outside the > law of God. Man may not transgress this law, even though no harm is > inflicted on one's neighbour. This is because the purpose of Divine law is > the education of all -- others as well as oneself -- and, in the sight of > God, the harm done to one individual or to his neighbour is the same and is > reprehensible in both cases. Hearts must possess the fear of God. Man should > endeavour to avoid that which is abhorrent unto God. Therefore, the freedom > that the laws of Europe offer to the individual does not exist in the law of > God. Freedom of thought should not transgress the bounds of courtesy, and > actions, likewise, should be governed by the fear of God and the desire to > seek His good pleasure. > > > Education of the individual Baha'i in the Divine law is one of the > duties of Spiritual Assemblies. In a letter to a National Assembly on 1 > March 1951, Shoghi Effendi wrote: > > The deepening and enrichment of the spiritual life of the individual > believer, his increasing comprehension of the essential verities > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > Dr. Susan Stiles Maneck > U.S.A. 8 February 1998 > Page 5 > > > underlying this Faith, his training in its administrative processes, his > understanding of the fundamentals of the Covenants established by its Author > and the authorized Interpreter of its teachings, should be made the supreme > objectives of the national representatives responsible for the edification, > the progress and consolidation of these communities. "Training": i.e., coercing of conscience, their interpretation of it. > Such is the duty resting on the elected institutions of the Faith for > the promotion of the spiritual, moral and ethical lives of the individual > believers. Parallel with this, the Baha'i Faith upholds the freedom of > conscience which permits a person to follow his chosen religion: no one may > be compelled to become a Baha'i, or to remain a Baha'i if he conscientiously > wishes to leave the Faith. As to the thoughts of the Baha'is themselves -- > that is those who have chosen to follow the religion of Baha'u'llah -- the > institutions do not busy themselves with what individual believers think > unless those thoughts become expressed in actions which are inimical to the > basic principles and vital interests of the Faith. Unless anyone disagrees with the uhj's fanatical coercion of conscience, interpretation, and has the courage of conviction to say so publicly, the willingness to sacrifice themselves on the altar of service and obedience to Baha'u'llah, not the corrupted uhj.... > With regard to the accusation that to make such distinctions borders on > restriction of the freedom of speech, one should accept that civil society > has long recognized that utterance can metamorphose into behaviour, and has > taken steps to protect itself and its citizens against such behaviour when > it becomes socially destructive. Laws against sedition and hate-mongering > are examples that come readily to mind. I.e., the uhj has the right to suppress freedom of speech and conscience, and define out of existence what they are. More double speak. > > It will surely be clear to you from the above comments that the > categories of "issues of doctrinal heresy which must therefore be > suppressed" and "the imposition of orthodoxy on the Baha'i community", to > which you refer, are concepts essentially drawn from the study of > Christianity and are inapplicable to the far more complex interrelationships > and principles established by the Baha'i Faith." More subtle coercion and suppression of conscience according to their own self-serving, twisted interpretation of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... > And the Writings clearly say that our conscience is to > be left free. "Soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:udhf0is3lkkb0c@corp.supernews.com... > > > > > > I have to think that our idea of conscience (as he mentions here as a > > reliable guide to conduct) is a pretty modern idea, late 19th century > > perhaps. But possible you could trace this back to Luther's idea of the > > "priesthood of all believers." In fact the modern idea of individual > > freedom is said to first appear during the Reformation (at least in the > > modern sense). > > Dear Randy, > > Now, admittedly I'm no expert on Christian history, but from what I know > Martin's idea strikes me as being pretty kooky. If he is trying to blame > Christian sectarianism on the doctrine of "the Holy Spirit" he's got a few > centuries to wait until the Trinitarian idea became fixed. And the > mainstream church was adamantly opposed to too much individualism -- they > complained long and loud about the Gnostics who took their own visions as > inspiration from God, instead of submitting themselves to the Church > authorities. Certainly, the medieval church was not composed of > free-wheeling, anti-authoritarian individualists! I can only shake my head > at the notion that for individual conscience to be subordinated to an > outside authority is supposed to be some kind of progress -- it took a lot > of blood, sweat, and tears for minds and consciences to be freed in the > first place. Of course, a lot of Baha'is have the notion that now we have > an authority that really, really is infallible, so therefore we can trust > them and submit to them without any harm done to us or to society. Uh-huh. > > I think you're right about the Reformation -- after all, if all believers > have the capacity to read and interpret scriptures for themselves, that > implies that individual conscience is in operation. That's why Dave quoting > all these scriptures about submitting to the Will of God is such a hoot. > Naturally, if someone is a believer, one's conscience is informed by one's > beliefs and understanding of scripture. But what the individual perceives > as the "Will of God" is may not necessarily jive with what a religious > authority tells him it is.*That's* what the issue is -- not whether or not > it is desirable to submit to the Will of God, but who gets to decide what > the Will of God is. And the Writings clearly say that our conscience is to > be left free. > > Actually, if I remember right, Luther was aware of the sort of can of worms > his "priesthood of all believers" notion opened. If anybody can interpret > for themselves, then some are bound to interpret wrong. But the alternative > is even worse. Lots worse. > > Love, Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > > > > What Doug Martin is saying would remove from humanity the right to think > for > > him/her self, without the consent of society (or read Baha'i > Institutions). > > > > In general I think where individualism is implicit in Christianity is in > the > > idea that each Christian has a personal relationship with Jesus or God > that > > no one else can interfere with, but this personal relationship was not > > something that ever caused the schisms or heresies in either the early > days > > or the latter days of that religion. I don't think this doctrine ever > lead > > to individual political freedoms or even religious freedoms of any kind. > > > > > "This system of belief has had many admirable results in the individual > > > spiritual life. Its unrestrained influence on social history, however, > > > reveals many limitations. It permitted the growth of the conviction not > > > only that personal conscience is the ultimate authority in life, but > also > > > that personal freedom is the highest good. The rise of a democratic > > > political philosophy and democratic processes in the West gave the final > > > blessing to this doctrine of individualism. "Christianity" and > "Democracy" > > > in time blended in the public mind as one vaguely defined, but immensely > > > influential popular cult of individualism, embracing people of all > > > religious denominations. Such a cult differs in several important ways > > > from the Teachings of Baha'u'llah". > > > > There may be a cult of "individualism" in Hollywood but I'm afraid it is > not > > something I've ever noticed combined with heavy duty Christianity of any > > kind. > > > > What is intriguing is the general drift of the thoughts expressed here. > Why > > does the UHJ think that individualism is so bad? Baha'u'llah only > condemned > > extreme and outrageous behavior, He never condemns moderate and healthy > > individualism or creativity. What is life without creativity? > > > > Basically what Martin has always been after is a form of collectivism > which > > is pernicious to all humanity and is in complete opposition to the > expressed > > teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha. > > > > Cheers, Randy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:39 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... uhj's justification for coercion to Maneck..... "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:udia8cqb5f6jad@corp.supernews.com... > > > I had thought perhaps you were aware of some other > > statement regarding conscience. The letter to Maneck > > you cite is her old rag from the uhj that she has regularly > > dredged up for years to justify their fanatical views and > > doesn't add anything new to the discussion. My comments > > on it below: > > Well, sorry Fred, to give you the same-old, same-old. I know I was pretty > appalled when I read this letter for the first time, and am somewhat amused > at how Susan trots it out from time to time in defense of the UHJ, seemingly > unaware of just how bad it makes them look. My original point was that the > UHJ,and at least two individuals on that body that we know of, are willing > to promote the idea that freedom of conscience is somehow an "un-Baha'i" > legacy of our Christian backgrounds. That's pretty scary. Scary, indeed. I agree. And a major part of the scariness is the manner in which such thinking is regularly hidden from the unsuspecting while an entirely different deceptive public image is cultivated by the cultists.... Fred ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 3:34 PM Subject: Re: Baha'i Principle of Progressive Revelation The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:jGdC8.2198$bK4.94769@news2.telusplanet.net... -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: CAUTION - Non-bahais - CAUTION - Non-bahais - CAUTION - Non-bahais - CAUTION - Non-bahais - I caution you that appearances may be deceiving on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. It cannot be ruled out that some of the most vociferous voices here are working on behalf of the bahai administration to create an atmosphere of vicious contention in order to discredit the views of others for unsuspecting outsiders, as well as to drive them away from investigating very deeply into what is taking place among bahais. I highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, to anyone interested in the bahai faith, as perhaps the best introduction to the many conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during the last few decades: "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html I also urge non-bahais to read some of the primary material on my and Professor Cole's websites and decide for themselves: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 8:40 AM Subject: Re: CAUTION - Non-bahais - CAUTION - Non-bahais - CAUTION - Non-bahais - OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." Further details in "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$lo0yvg$wvz1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Here's an objective opinion for you Elderkin, > > > https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html > > "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our > individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, > in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the > greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions > or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent > to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the > Faith." -Doug Martin > > -- > Freethought110 > > "Mark Elderkin" wrote in message > news:abir6l$1lvt$1@austar-news.austar.net.au... > > Fred........... that is a lot of bunk. Your continuous cross-posting and > > anoying spam does a discredit to those here who might actually have > > questions or concerns. You make these wild-ass accusations and never have > > anything to give it any credit. The only opinion you seem to think has any > > importance here....... is yourself and those who have decided to trash the > > Faith. Karen's article is just that......... It should be a noted concern > to > > those who would like independent information about the Faith should > realise > > that you are ex-Baha'is who is intent in damage rather than a presentation > > of objective opinions. > > M > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > news:abgbgc$i7fff$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > CAUTION - Non-bahais - > > > > > > I caution you that appearances may be deceiving on > > > talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. It cannot be ruled > > > out that some of the most vociferous voices here are working > > > on behalf of the bahai administration to create an atmosphere > > > of vicious contention in order to discredit the views of others > > > for unsuspecting outsiders, as well as to drive them away from > > > investigating very deeply into what is taking place among bahais. > > > > > > I highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American > > > Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, to anyone interested > > > in the bahai faith, as perhaps the best introduction to the many > > > conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during > > > the last few decades: > > > > > > "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" > > > may be found on her website: > > > https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > > > > > I also urge non-bahais to read some of the primary material on > > > my and Professor Cole's websites and decide for themselves: > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > -- > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: The Antinomies of My Soul.... A bahai fanatic posted: > https://homes.hypermart.net/ Should anyone be interested in the totality of my soul, here are a few of its other dimensions neglected by the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, in their weird attempts to malign and discredit.... https://fglaysher.com/ https://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~glaysher/index.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 10:14 AM Subject: Re: The Antinomies of My Soul.... The Antinomies of My Soul.... A bahai fanatic posted: > https://homes.hypermart.net/ Should anyone be interested in the totality of my soul, here are a few of its other dimensions neglected by the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, in their weird attempts to malign and discredit.... https://fglaysher.com/ https://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~glaysher/index.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 6:35 AM Subject: Who I Am *versus* Fundamentalist Slander, Backbiting, Scapegoating, etc. A bahai fanatic posted: > https://homes.hypermart.net/ Should anyone be interested in the totality of my soul, here are a few of its other dimensions neglected by the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, in their weird attempts to malign and discredit.... Frederick Glaysher, Poems, Essays, Reviews, https://fglaysher.com/ Our Glaysher Genealogy https://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~glaysher/index.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 6:58 AM Subject: Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice - "Dangerous Delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member - D. Martin Menu: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 7:13 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0205121800.1796be2a@posting.google.com... > Hi, folks. I don't check this board too often, but I happened to, > tonight. > > The original discussion was more important than the one you've gotten > off on. For those new to this thread, I believe the jist of the discussion started here: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm > But I just did want to intervene to express outrage that Baha'u'llah's > writings were so wretchedly misused to attack the importance of > individual conscience. Baha'u'llah himself speaks of the centrality > of the latter. What do you think he means when he attacks blind > obedience and insists that justice consists of seeing things with your > own eyes. That's the individual conscience at work. It is called > d.ami:r and wujda:n in Arabic and Baha'u'llah has nothing but praise > for its working. `Abdu'l-Baha also praised it. Yes, "wretchedly misused." Fine phrase. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > The quotes condemning "self" by Baha'u'llah are not condemnations of > the individual conscience. The word for "self" in the original is > "nafs." The Muslim mystics spoke of various kinds of "self," good and > bad. The worst is an-nafs al-ammarah bi su', or the self that is at > the command of evil. It is, in other words, the self of carnal > passions, unbridled desires. That is the "self" Baha'u'llah > condemned. The word for *individual* would be quite different, as > would the word for conscience. Well, no room for distinctions among the > In fact, conscience is the exact opposite of the "self" condemned by > Baha'u'llah, since it is the working of ethical reasoning inside the > individual. > So, to quote Baha'u'llah condemning self and passion and to equate > that with > a condemnation of the individual's ethical conscience, is an absolute > travesty. The horrible thing is that there are Baha'is who read the > scriptures in this insane way, and maybe even a lot of them. > > Douglas Martin hates individual conscience because he is a cultist. > Cultists want to control people, and don't want any pesky objections > when they behave dictatorially. Conscience leads people to object when > they witness injustice. > > As for backbiting people, here's a beaut. In 1982 when I was a > pioneer in India, doing travel teaching for the Indian NSA and also > doing some translation work for the House of Justice, Doug Martin told > more than one person that he considered me "a covenant breaker." > These persons later became my friends and told me what Martin had > said. They are persons of absolute integrity, and I have no doubt > that they have spoken correctly. It is no accident that it was after > Martin got himself elected to the UHJ in 1993 that the attitude of the > House changed so dramatically toward Baha'i thinkers like myself, who > had earlier been encouraged, and we started receiving secret visits > from Martin's cronies threatening us with being declared CBs if we did > not fall silent. Martin has long had a cultic attitude, and now he is > in a position to implement it at the highest levels of the Baha'i > institutions. > > So, dear friends, not only have I been backbit, I've been turned in > the eyes of perhaps a majority of US Baha'is into a cartoon villain > whom it is perfectly alright to backbite in the most vicious way. And > it all started with Martin's viciousness and tyrannical impulses, his > narrow-minded fundamentalism, as far back as the early 1980s. > > cheers Juan Cole ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 7:26 AM Subject: ATTN AOL - Scientology & bahai faith - $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit Church of Scientology pays $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit (11-May-02) The Church of Scientology has agreed to pay a former member more than $8.6 million to resolve a lawsuit filed nearly 22 years ago. FULL TEXT AT https://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/05/11/scientology.suit.ap/index.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 7:37 AM Subject: Re: ATTN AOL - Scientology & bahai faith - $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit Subject: ATTN AOL Lawyers - Scientology $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit Date: 5/13/2002 8:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: Fglaysh12002 Message-id: <20020513083330.02565.00011509@mb-dh.aol.com> ATTN AOL Lawyers - Scientology $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit Please diligently investigate the issues involved here on these bahai message boards and the seriousness of the constitutional questions: Church of Scientology pays $8.6 million to resolve lawsuit (11-May-02) The Church of Scientology has agreed to pay a former member more than $8.6 million to resolve a lawsuit filed nearly 22 years ago. FULL TEXT AT https://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/05/11/scientology.suit.ap/index.html Frederick Glaysher www.google.com Search Engine: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 5:50 AM Subject: Re: Individual conscience... "When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0205131027.5c6de4a1@posting.google.com... > Dave, these things are difficult to discuss in the abstract. > > Individual conscience (vujdan, damir) is ethical reasoning. > Revelation contains the ethics. Conscience is how you apply them in > your individual life. > > The more cult-like elements in the Baha'i faith want you to give up > your individual ability to reason ethically once you enter the faith. > Thus, if you see Baha'i officials repeatedly doing something wrong, > and you also see that appeals to the higher-ups are stonewalled so > that the wrongdoing continues, you are expected just to keep your > silence about it all. (Remind anyone of the pedophilia scandal in the > Roman Catholic Church?) > > Anytime any group of people tells you that 1) you are not allowed > publicly to criticize their power elite and 2) that you must give up > your individual ability to reason ethically and just fall lockstep > behind whatever the infallible leaders decide--then you are dealing > with a cult. > > Any time a person buys into propositions 1) and 2), he or she has > become a cultist. Any time he or she buys into all this and then > tries to hide the fact, or obscure it for others, or engage in > misdirection by launching stock accusations at anyone who won't go > along, then that person has him or herself become a cultist. That is > only one step away from the People's Temple in Guyana or the > Koreishites at Waco. Once someone gives up the right to use his or > her individual conscience, there is no reason not to drink the poison > coolaid, or not to set the children on fire. > > It is for this reason, to protect the Cause of God from slipping into > cultism, that Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha so heavily praised seeing > with your own eyes and not with the eyes of others (i.e. not with the > eyes of the NSA or the house of justice), and that they so heavily > praised freedom of conscience and forbade Baha'i institutions to > interfere with it. > > Douglas Martin wants to repeal that part of the Revelation that > sanctifies the conscience of the individual believer. He wants to do > so because he gets more power and possibly more wealth that way. > Trying to repeal part of the Revelation for your own selfish purposes > is a form of treason to the Faith. > > cheers Juan > > cheers Juan ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:25 AM Subject: Re: Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice - "Dangerous Delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience Karen Bacquet commenting similarly on Doug Martin, Peter Khan, and Jane Faily: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Bacquet2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Ron House" wrote in message news:3CE31E8A.B68B891@usq.edu.au... > Freethought110 wrote: > > > > Ron, > > > > You once stated here (or was it talisman9) that Peter Khan said something > > similar to you. > > Indeed. I don't doubt at all that Doug Martin expressed sentiments along > the lines of those reported. I just doubt that he used those _exact_ > words in expressing them. In other words, whilst I think that criticism > of the general viewpoint is justified, I don't agree that it is valid to > make an argument that hinges on the precise words in the passage (unless > we can get verification that it was transcribed from a tape, thus > eliminating an important source of error). I know most commentary here > isn't doing that, but the one comment seemed to do so (to my mind, at > least). > > Likewise, I am prepared to testify in any court that Peter Khan > expressed that same viewpoint (very forcefully, in fact), but I cannot > testify to the precise words he used when he did so. > > For the record, the general thrust of Khan's statement was: > > 1) When you become a Baha'i, that is the end of your independent search > for truth; > > (shortly after, in response to a question on conscience:) > > 2) (Repeated the question, then responded) In the Baha'i Faith, the > writings are our guide, and the directions of the House take precedence > over our consciences. (Explained further at some length.) > > Now the above is ONLY the general thrust of the discussion; the words > used are mine, as this was two decades ago, except that I am close to > certain he used the phrase "end of your independent search for truth" or > something almost identical to it. That phrase stuck because it was quite > theatrical the way he did it, leaving it hanging there some seconds for > maximum shock value before proceeding. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > https://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house > "Every time you manage to close the door on Reality, > it comes in through the window." - (Unknown). ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:39 AM Subject: FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING - This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of FULL TEXT - uhj threatens EDITOR'S - Marriage - ESSENTIAL READING This letter is essential to understanding the censorship and coercion of conscience that has become increasingly pervasive in the bahai faith since 1970. It was apparently written by the uhj to Anthony A. Lee, editor of Kalimat Press, a small bahai publishing house, which initially had an agreement with Columbia University Press to distribute the book to bahai readers: https://www.kalimat.com/ Compare Prof. Juan Cole's response to excerpts of this letter at https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/modernit.htm Three reviews of Cole's book, from different perspectives, may be found at Modernity and the Millennium https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm For the use of similarly coercive tactics by the bahai administration, see Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email of 1997. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm For the uninformed, it should be noted, beforehand, that it has been alleged by a number of bahais and ex-bahais, that the uhj has apparently forced some couples to divorce in order to prove their loyalty and obedience and some family members to cease associating with siblings, children, and parents. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl3.htm The full text below also available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/KalimatP.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ----------------- August 1999 Transmitted by email: XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX U.S.A. Dear Baha'i Friend, The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, signed by you on behalf of VVVVV Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which VVVVV has promoted to Baha'is Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows. A good deal of the work of VVVV Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of VVVVV's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Baha'i Faith. As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. GGGGGGGG, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention. It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address. Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of Mr. XXXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 2 attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse. Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Baha'i scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it. As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization. What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own". As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 3 the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived identification with their purpose. The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.) Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him? Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests VVVVV's activities are ostensibly designed to serve. The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create VVVV Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the VVVVV enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. Mr. XXXXXX 3 August 1999 Page 4 The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"? The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with GGGG's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, GGGG asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter. In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing. The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face. With loving Baha'i greetings, Department of the Secretariat ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:40 AM Subject: American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal --- "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal I highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, to anyone interested in the bahai faith, as perhaps the best introduction to the many conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during the last few decades: "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---- "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:44 AM Subject: "dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience - Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 6:45 AM Subject: bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 --- To understand the influence of the bahai faith on the United Nations, bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UNmenu.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship To understand the influence of the bahai faith on the United Nations, I suggest the reader might find it helpful to consider these documents in the following order: Doug Martin, member of the bahai universal house of justice on the United Nations: "In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so." {If interested in reading full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "UN" match case, several clicks into it)} Cf. Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm See then my messages on the bahai faith & the UN: uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm Bahai international community Abuses its Access to UN MF Mailing List 4/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/OneCountry.htm Note especially at the end that the bic abused its control over MFDiscuss@yahoo.com in order to suppress my informing other Forum members of its abuse. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin who holds such a fundamentalist interpretation of the bahai faith. Does the UN know the record of the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its own ranks? I would find it very worrisome if it does. My guess is that bahais at the UN, such as Techeste Ahderom, co-chair of the Millennium Forum and the principal bahai representative to the United Nations, dismiss concerns whenever they are raised by anyone within the Organization, essentially participating in deception. Brief History of Douglas Martin Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 3:09 PM Subject: Re: MODERNITY AND THE MILLENNIUM (long) Three other reviews: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/reviews-cole.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Michael McKenny" wrote in message news:ac5k4m$eno$1@freenet9.carleton.ca... > > MODERNITY AND THE MILLENNIUM, Juan R.I. Cole, Columbia University Press, > New York, 1998. > > This absorbing work examines the emergence deeply within the 19th Century > Islamic world of a universalist movement aware of the modern thought of > the contemporary West, assessing and expressing this in familiar terms. > > The Introduction (pp. 1-15) begins by contrasting absolutist rule, unequal > status and censored thought of pre-modern life with the rule of law, > individual freedom, and scientific enquiry forming the foundations of > modern economic, technological and administrative developments. It > proceeds to comments of the book's five main themes: religious liberty, > political constitutionalism, nationalism and feminism. It addresses > Western assumptions: > > Yet to posit the Middle East or Islamic culture as intrinsically > antimodern is to commit two fallacies of essentialism, implying somehow > that modernity is a unified phenomenon and that there is a single, > civilizational Muslim or Middle Eastern response to it. p. 9 > > The reader is reminded that there was influence both ways in the encounter > of East and West. The introduction then closes by underlining the book's > focus of examining the thought of Baha'u'llah as a response to the initial > wave of modernity in the Middle East. > > Chapter One, "Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State" (pp. > 17-47). looks at changing attitudes on this topic in the West, at > traditional Islamic thought, and at the views of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l > Baha. An awareness of the diversity of human views, even within dictated > conformity is conveyed. > > The mixing of state making with religion making had its successes, of > course, but these were seldom total. English Catholics, French > Huguenots, Ottomon Shiites, and Iranian Sunnis continued to exist, > along with a host of other sectarian movements, despite the best > efforts of government officials to establish religious monopolies in > their territory. The state could never truly dictate the consciences of > human beings, succeeding only in imposing a broad umbrella of outward > conformity (especially in the cities) and a fear of speaking one's mind > that impeded the progress of rational thought and scientific discovery. > pp. 18-19 > > There is a mention of the differing concepts of church and state within > Sunni and Shiite Islam, of the influence of Mongol concepts of rulership > in later states. > > In these later empires the ruler issued laws and regulations that > governed the functioning of the state and bureaucracy. But other sorts > of law, such as that governing personal status, inheritance, and > commerce, remained the purview of Muslim clerical judges (qadis) on the > state payroll. Here we have not a separation of religion and state at > all but a differentiation within the state of civil and religious > functions, insofar as religious officers were appointed and paid by the > state and performed their duties on its behalf. p. 22 > > There is mention of the Bab who claimed to be the returned Imam, of his > execution and of the repression of his movement. > > After the Bab's death a number of Babi leaders and sects grew up. Some > were antinomian, declaring all laws and restraints on behavior > abolished, whereas others looked to the Bab's holy book, the Bayan, for > guidance. Some followed one or another prominent disciple of the Bab, > though by 1852 most of these were dead. p. 27 > > There is reference to Baha'u'llah's claim to succession and his views, as > well as those of his son, on the central theme of this chapter. > > Baha'u'llah is in these passages making an argument for religious > liberty and equal rights for all citizens, based upon the normative > foundations of Iranian monarchy...Once he reached Akka Baha'u'llah on > numerous occassions made it quite clear that he and his religion > accepted the separation of church and state. p. 34 > > Chapter Two, "Baha'u'llah and Ottoman Constitutionalism" (pp. 49-77), > begins by mentioning the impact of modernity on absolute monarchies and > the increasing power of the modern state. It looks at the introduction of > constitutionalism into the Islamic world, and the complex position of > Baha'u'llah on this issue. There's the item that Sadik Effendi, an Ottoman > clergyman, had preached against the Sultan and had been exiled at the turn > of 1868/1869 to Akka where he likely interacted with Baha'is. There's > reference to Baha'u'llah sending letters to rulers, to his view that > absolute monarchy will die out and to his call for constitutional > monarchy. Baha'u'llah called for political liberty, conscious of the > excesses of the French Revolution, and stating the need for balance. > > Clearly, Baha'u'llah approved of political liberty as manifested in > democratic institutions, but not of anti-religious libertinism (the > other connotation of burriyah in nineteenth century Arabic). p. 66 > > In addition individuals had responsibilities. > > The chapter proceeds to examine the interaction in the 1870s of Baha'is > and Young Ottomans. Baha'u'llah was in correspondence with Ebuzzia > Teufik, Namik Kemal was a friend of Mishkin Qalam and Nuri Bey and Hakki > Effendi were exiles in Akka fond of the Baha'is. > > Hakki Effendi paints a vivid picture of the Baha'is as cosmopolitan > intellectuals who had their children tutored in European languages and > took a keen interest in the international press. p. 69 > > There is a brief survey of the Ottoman political scene and the career of > Midhat Pasha, who as governor of Syria asked Abdu'l Baha to meet him, and > earlier as Minister of War had helped depose Sultan Abdulaziz. Then > there's a return to Baha'u'llah's condemnation of absolute monarchy. > > Here he bestows a rationale on popular sovereignty, grounding it in > universal reason. This privileging of rationality might seem strange > coming from a prophet, except if we remember that Baha'u'llah had > renounced claims for his religion upon civil governance, where he > expected instead a communicative rationality he called "consultation" > to be the mode of operation. And here he grounds democratic > consultation in human reason. p. 73 > > Chapter Three (pp. 79-108) considers Iranian political reform. It looks > at Abdu'l Baha's SECRET OF DIVINE CIVILIZATION as well as the > parliamentary views of Fath-'Ali Akhunzadeh and the opinions of other > reform-minded Persians. Beyond representative government, Abdu'l Baha > called for economic development and eliminating poverty. And: > > He calls for a reform of the curriculum of Iran's schools and > seminaries, so that more practical subjects would be stressed in the > place of theology and metaphysics. Universal education should be > provided; intellectuals should be free to publish books and articles > that contain suggestions for improving the public welfare. An educated > public opinion should be encouraged. p. p. 85 > > Next comes an examination of Baha'u'llah's encouragement of Baha'is to > conduct their own community affairs by consultation, his personal > attention to the care of indigent Baha'is and his setting up and > delineating the jurisdiction of the house of justice. There is some > consideration of technical terms, such as millat ("bounded religious > community"p. 96) and umur-i siyasiyyih ("the imposition of sanctions" > p. 96) as well as the use of mulham ("inspired" p. 96). > > Baha'u'llah never used the word ma'sum, or sinless, or infallible to > describe these institutions and appears to have seen them more as > instruments of spiritual republicanism than as inerrant centers of > unchallengable dicta. p. 96 > > The point is made that such a focus on group leadership in the Baha'i > community contrasted with the Shiite view of a single clergyman issuing > decrees. There's then a look at the great civil unrest occasioned by the > Shah's granting of the tobacco concession to a foreigner. The Shah later > rescinded the concession, but the Englishman was paid, perhaps > excessively, for his loss. A spectrum of Baha'i and general Iranian views > on reforms and the means thereto is presented. It is mentioned that the > official Baha'i opposition to adherents involving themselves in politics > does not come from Baha'u'llah, and in his lifetime there were Baha'is in > political positions. > > Chapter Four, "Disciplining the State" (pp. 109-138), begins with > Baha'u'llah's words on this theme to Edward Brown in 1890, examines the > Islamic concept of jihad, the broad minded views of the Mughal emperor > Akbar, including his concept of emperor as "guarantor of universal peace > (sulh-i kull)" and returns to Baha'u'llah's promotion of peace and his > prohibition of jihad. Next it surveys European thought on international > authority and peace from Emeric Cruce in the early 17th Century to > Saint-Simon and his followers in the 19th. It mentions Rousseau's > reference to such thinkers and concepts, significant because Rousseau was > widely read and translated in the Middle East. > > It would be fruitless to search for a single conduit of knowledge about > the later peace groups and their ideas into the Ottoman Empire. > Nineteenth-century Middle Eastern political figures and intellectuals > were keen observers of Europe, reading European books and newspapers, > translating selections from both for the local press, and discussing > developments at cultural evenings in their homes. The tradition of > European peace thought was by the mid-nineteenth century a > pan-Mediterranean one, and the network of intellectuals, statesmen and > expatriote Europeans in which Baha'u'llah moved was aware of the issues > it raised. p. 124 > > There follows Baha'u'llah's call for collective security, suggestive of > the Crimean system and of calls for an international congress by > Baha'u'llah and by Napoleon III. In 1898 Tsar Nicholas II succeeded in > having such a congress held, although participants failed to set up a > means for international arbitration. Next comes a look at education as an > effective method of inculcating an awareness of identity as members of > humanity and transcending aggressive and divisive actions. And, there's a > look at the growth of European imperialism, with some details concerning > its impact on the Islamic world, and Baha'u'llah's denunciation of > imperialism and militarism. > > Chapter Five, "The Earth is But One Country" (pp. 137-161), begins by > looking at 19th Century concepts of the nation and current awareness (e.g. > modern genetics) challenging its assumptions. Also, > > A consideration of the state leads us to a recognition of the violence > and coercion inherent in nation making. The state must subdue and > encompass the peasants, often with much bloodshed, or must reorganize > them into estates, or collectives, or must delegate such disciplining > of their imaginations to big landlords and private property law. Gory > peasant struggles against a local landed elite or against a colonial > state have often figured largely in their accession to a nationalist > consciousness. Through conscripting peasants into a national army and > casting them against a foreign power, as well, the state employed > massive violence to constitute them as a nation. p. 145 > > Among nationalist influences in 19th Century Persia was the view that > Islam was introduced by barbarians to the detriment of the civilization of > the homeland. Baha'u'llah encouraged a transcendence of particularism, as > had the great mystic Rumi. This is considered in the sphere of religion > where Baha'u'llah abolished the concept of ritual uncleanness of > unbelievers and urged awareness of the varying valid perceptions of > different humans. Baha'u'llah's concept of progressive revelation, > validating the prophets and religions of the past, is mentioned. > > The Baha'i religion is therefore in his view only an essential > restatement of the timeless truths embodied in past religions, along > with a reformation of religious law and ideals so as to bring them into > accord with the needs of a humanity verging on the creation of the > first global civilization. p. 153 > > There comes a fascinating consideration of 19th Century states focusing on > national standardized languages and of Baha'u'llah's position that a > universal auxiliary language be chosen and taught in all the schools of > the planet to foster global understanding and world peace. > > Chapter Six, "Women Are As Men" (pp. 163-187), looks at the milieu of > reformist ideas on the role and rights of women. > > The new models of women's behavior arose from many sources. Accounts of > Western women appeared in Middle Eastern periodicals and books, as did > arguments for reform of women's position in Muslim societies. Some > changes were brought about for practical reasons by middle- and upper- > class Iranian families moving away from semifeudal styles of life to > more "modern," often bourgois ones. p. 163 > > There is mention of Baha'u'llah's sometimes using feminine imagery in > connection with the divine, of his support for the powerful Babi feminist > Tahirih, of the significant role played by women in the early history of > the Baha'i Faith, of Baha'u'llah's extensive correspondence with female > believers, of the improved, though still unequal, status of women in > Baha'u'llah's legal code, as contrasted with the Koran, and of his strong > statements in support of concept of gender equality, including that > forming the title of the chapter. > > The issue of the reservation of the Baha'i Houses of Justice for men, so > poignantly at the heart of early 21st Century Baha'i life, is not absent > from the chapter. It seems evident that humanity cannot achieve harmonious > agreement that equality and women transcending male domination mean an all > male Universal House of Justice. The relevant material from the period > covered by this work is outlined. > > The Conclusion (pp. 189-197) begins by underlining the diversity of Islam > and its vigorous consideration, overthe last two centuries, of modernity. > It proceeds to the Baha'i Faith emerging in this milieu and conscious of > both beneficial and constraining aspects of modernity. Hence, Bahai's > sought to avoid the excesses of nationalism (war, colonialism, suppression > of religion), and of socially irresponsible individualism (extremes of > wealth, expropriation of peasants' land, famine), seeking the balanced > utopian realism of enhanced individual rights within an inclusive and > socially concerned global community. > > While it is hoped this review provides some exposure to the contents of > this first academic book-length treatment of the Baha'i prophet, this > reviewer honestly feels that anyone desiring a real appreciation of such > material should realize the book itself is indespensible. > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 5:37 AM Subject: bahai - Terrorism & OFF- ONline Stalking - I see *little* difference between the basic underlying fanaticism bahai - Terrorism & OFF- ONline Stalking - After twenty-five years as a member of the bahai faith, I see *little* difference between the basic underlying fanaticism of the perpetrators of the WTC terrorist attack and the fundamentalism of the worst elements among my fellow bahais. I cite Dave Fiorito's intolerant, threatening, hateful post as further EVIDENCE, along with much of the documentation on my website. https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.g oogle.com&output=gplain In my view, only the uhj can begin to remedy this situation by abolishing the censorship of "review" and ceasing to interpret out of existence of the moderate and liberal Teachings on free speech and conscience, thereby by setting a new direction and tone for the faith. I consider it my duty, as a bahai and otherwise, to inform my fellow believers and citizens of how grave matters truly stand within what purports to be Baha'u'llah's religion. Some of the evidence may be found at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/hate.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/CHarassment.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BahaiThreatsLawsuit.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/BahaiAttacksonme.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Ex.htm See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on AOL's message boards: Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" may be found on her website: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 5:38 AM Subject: bahai - FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship2001.Zip 18 megabytes bahai - FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship2001.Zip 18 megabytes zipped - 12/31/2001 Includes All Archives https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm BahaiCensorship2001CD version! 23 megabytes zipped 1/1/2002 https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 10:14 AM Subject: Re: It's a FACT - More Hits than USA bahais - 28,000+ The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Given Professor Cole's recent article and further opportunity to investigate and reflect on actual bahai enrollment in the US, I'm now willing to acknowledge that I may have indeed been too skeptical in my own estimate of 28,000. Anyone care to speculate on how many of the perhaps, at best, 60,000 US bahais are actually fundamenalist in mentality? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0205290616.ad4ad6b@posting.google.com... > My article on "The Baha'i Faith in Panopticon" was brought up with the > implication that it was inaccurate in accepting the Kosmin and Lachman > poll estimating 28,000 in the early 1990s. > > In actual fact, I openly said that I thought those poll results were > probably too low, and I quoted Wilmette insiders as giving the number > of registered adult Baha'is as about 60,000. > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > The increased numbers of Baha'is between the early 1990s and 2001 in > the Kosmin survey, from 28,000 to 84,000, cannot be used to show an > actual increase in the number of enrolled Baha'is. > > Virtually every knowledgeable academic observer believed that the > 28,000 figure was too low. It could partially have been produced by > statistical accident. In a very small group, if you call the wrong > homes in a 110,000 person poll, you don't get them. The poll was > mainly useful for fixing the larger groups. > > Also, the number represented those who were so invested in the Baha'i > faith that they made it their primary identity. Large numbers of the > Baha'is in South Carolina, e.g., thought they were Christians whose > Christ has returned. Moreover, a *lot* of Iranian Baha'is in > California had only been here about 10 years then; some did not have > good English and many were too distrustful of outsiders (based on > experiences in Iran) to be willing to answer a telephone poll about > their religion. > > It would be very interesting to know exactly what methodological or > other changes accounted for the increased numbers. One possibility is > that the estimated 12,000-15,000 (some say over 20,000) > Iranian-American Baha'is cooperated with the poll this time, now being > either second generation or 20-year veterans of living in the States. > Another possibility is that the 10,000 or so African-American > Baha'i/Baptists in the South now have a stronger Baha'i identity. You > could pick up 25,000-30,000 just with these two groups having a change > of consciousness and/or willingness to answer telephone polls. > > It therefore is not necessary to posit actual increases of converts > over deaths and withdrawals in the past decade, which I do not believe > could be demonstrated. I can remember years in the '90s when even > Wilmette admitted that it was a wash. (Many Baha'is focus only on > conversions, not withdrawals or deaths, as though the latter don't > have to be factored in). > > A counsellor told a friend of mine that *worldwide* from about 1986 to > 1996 deaths and withdrawals in the Baha'i community just about equaled > conversions to the faith, of which there had only been 400,000 in that > decade. There is no reason to think the U.S. fared better than the > Third World in that decade, and in fact every reason to think that it > did not attract nearly as many converts. > > The usefulness of both polls lies not in fixing exact numbers, which > they cannot do. A poll of 110,000 households in a population of 280 > mn. can't get the small groups exactly right. Their usefulness is in > setting a template against which popular Baha'i claims can be gauged. > Many Baha'is have asserted to me that there are large numbers of > self-identified Baha'is who are not on the rolls--going back to the > 60s and 70s mass teaching. This kind of assertion simply could not be > true given the Kosmin results. Likewise, claims of 140,000 Baha'is on > the rolls, or 170,000, can be measured against the telephone polls to > raise questions about how many of those people have actually drifted > away, or aren't actively self-identified any longer. > > Note that nice religious communities like the Unitarian Universalists > have the opposite configuration. They claim 200,000 (with a big > increase in the 1990s), but Kosmin and Lachman estimated 500,000 > Americans in the early 1990s who identified themselves as Unitarian > Universalists. When you are nice, and don't persecute your > intellectuals, arbitrarily toss people out on their ears, officially > censor everything they publish, and actually do good things for real > people, then Americans *want* to be identified with you. > > I'd be glad to be informed about any particular alleged facts in the > Panopticon article which are actually incorrect. Rightwing Baha'is > keep railing against it, but I've never been able to get any of them > to specify what exactly is wrong. I had good evidence for everything > I said, and I stand by it until proven wrong. > > cheers Juan Cole ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:34 AM Subject: WHO I AM *versus* Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... WHO I AM *versus* Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... WHO I AM *versus* Ad hominem, slander, demonize, scapegoat, shun... etc.... A bahai fanatic posted: > https://homes.hypermart.net/ Should anyone be interested in the totality of my soul, here are a few of its other dimensions neglected by the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, in their weird attempts to malign and discredit.... Frederick Glaysher, Poems, Essays, Reviews, https://fglaysher.com/ Our Glaysher Genealogy https://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~glaysher/index.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:15 AM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: Fwd: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:15:40 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE8F264600BB40043161D8EC896315240; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:06 -0700 >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) >with SMTP id SAA28647;Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:08:02 -0400 >From 1country@bic.org Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:58 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >In-Reply-To: > > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >Your address has been removed from our complimentary mailing list. We >apologize >for any inconvenience. > >Regards, > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the >Bahá'í International Community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >New York, NY 10017 USA >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 >email: rshoffst@bic.org >web: https://www.onecountry.org >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:36 PM > > To: 1country@bic.org > > Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > One Country > > Newsletter of the bahai international community > > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical >propaganda. > > > > RECID#: 26201 > > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > > > > EXCERPTS: > > > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for what > > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic impluse >of > > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning is >the > > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human >being. > > > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the >eyes of > > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a keen >sense > > of justice and openness.... > > > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified in > > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in the > > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of us >that > > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of our > > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious faith > > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, >then > > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for truth >will > > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record of >bahai > > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website below. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > POSTED to talk.religion.bahai > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > > https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at https://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:17 AM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: Fwd: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the Darkness" - October-Decem >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> >To: "Frederick Glaysher" >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the >Darkness" - October-Decem >Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:46:49 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE901A82006B40043164D8EC896320BE1; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:18 -0700 >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) >with SMTP id KAA06891;Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:39:10 -0400 >From 1country@bic.org Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:30:41 -0700 >Message-ID: >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >In-reply-to: >Importance: Normal > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > >We get our lists from a variety of sources. Your name may have been from >any >one of a number of conference lists, directories, or submissions from other >organizations with whom we associate. Our list generally consists of >prominent >people and organizations active in matters of global concern. Perhaps your >name >made it to one of these lists and was entered to our complimentary mailing >list. > >The publication is sent at no charge to the recipients and many of our >readers >are interested in the articles about NGO conferences, development >activities and >in the book reviews and other items that relate to their field, as well as >in >learning more about the philosophy and activities of members of the Baha'i >Faith. If they are not interested, they ask to be removed from the list, >as you >did, and their record is deleted from our files. > >I'm sorry this seems to have caused you such distress. As I said, your >name has >been removed from our mailing list. > >Sincerely, > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the >Bahá'í International Community >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 >New York, NY 10017 USA >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 >email: rshoffst@bic.org >web: https://www.onecountry.org >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM > > To: 1country@bic.org > > Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > On the first page of the list of participants it is > > clearly stated that "This information is intended strictly as a >reference > > and should not be used in any other fashion without the > > written permission of the Millennium Forum." > > https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/MFParticipants.pdf > > > > As an accredited participant, I ask does the bic have > > such explicit written permission from the Millennium Form? > > > > cc: MFDiscuss@yahoogroups.com and inquiries@un.org > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "One Country" <1country@bic.org> > > >To: "Frederick Glaysher" > > >Subject: RE: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > >Darkness" - October-Decem > > >Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:15:40 -0400 > > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > > >Received: from [216.236.137.99] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id > > >MHotMailBE8F264600BB40043161D8EC896315240; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:06 >-0700 > > >Received: from ONECOUNTRY ([192.168.0.16])by mail.bic.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) > > >with SMTP id SAA28647;Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:08:02 -0400 > > >From 1country@bic.org Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:08:58 -0700 > > >Message-ID: > > >X-Priority: 3 (Normal) > > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > > >Importance: Normal > > >X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 > > >In-Reply-To: > > > > > > > > >Dear Mr. Glaysher, > > > > > >Your address has been removed from our complimentary mailing list. We > > >apologize > > >for any inconvenience. > > > > > >Regards, > > > > > >Veronica Shoffstall, Editorial Assistant > > >ONE COUNTRY, the newsletter of the > > >Bahá'í International Community > > >866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > >New York, NY 10017 USA > > >tel: 212-803-2543 fax: 212-803-2566 > > >email: rshoffst@bic.org > > >web: https://www.onecountry.org > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > >"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens." > > >Bahá'u'lláh > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: FG [mailto:FG@hotmail.com] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:36 PM > > > > To: 1country@bic.org > > > > Subject: One Country - "Belief and Tolerance: Lights Amidst the > > > > Darkness" - October-Decem > > > > > > > > > > > > One Country > > > > Newsletter of the bahai international community > > > > 866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 120 > > > > NY, NY 10017 1country@bic.org > > > > > > > > Please remove me from your mailing list. While I was an accredited > > > > participant at the Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), I never gave > > > > permission to the bahai international community to use my private > > > > information for the delivery of its deceptive and hypocritical > > >propaganda. > > > > > > > > RECID#: 26201 > > > > Mr. Frederick Glaysher > > > > INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANT > > > > [address withheld to protect me from further recriminations] > > > > > > > > > > > > EXCERPTS: > > > > > > > > The human spirit must be free to know. Apprehending who we are, for >what > > > > purpose we exist, and how we should live our lives, is a basic >impluse > > >of > > > > human consciousness. This quest for self-understanding and meaning >is > > >the > > > > esssence of life itself. The innate and fundamental aspiration to > > > > investigate reality is thus a right and an obligation of every human > > >being. > > > > > > > > To search for truth--to see with one's "own eyes and not through the > > >eyes of > > > > other"--is to undertake a procvess of spiritual discovery with a >keen > > >sense > > > > of justice and openness.... > > > > > > > > The right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief now codified >in > > > > international human rights instruments directly finds its roots in >the > > > > scriptures of the world's religions. This fact should assure each of >us > > >that > > > > truth need not be feared, as it has many facets and shelters all of >our > > > > diverse expressions of faith. If, after all, people of religious >faith > > > > believe that the Creator is eternal and the center of all existence, > > >then > > > > they must also believe that the unfettered and genuine search for >truth > > >will > > > > lead to truth.... Etc., etc., etc.... > > > > > > > > NON-BAHAI OBSERVERS: > > > > > > > > Please compare these dishonest claims with the 50+ megabyte record >of > > >bahai > > > > coercion and suppression of conscience available on my website >below. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > POSTED to talk.religion.bahai > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > > > > https://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > > https://www.hotmail.com > > > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. https://www.hotmail.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 8:28 AM Subject: Re: Moral Education of the Children OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." Further details in "The Bahai Technique": https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:PLYJ8.11210$qA.237265@news2.telusplanet.net... Moral Education of the Children "Against this gloomy backdrop of a decadent society, Bahá'í children should shine as the emblems of a better future." The Universal House of Justice Edmonton Mabel Pine Bahá'í School Mabel Pine Bahá'í School provides children with moral, spiritual, and social teachings of the Bahá'í Faith and maintains an environment for the children where their sense of "human honor" would be developed and preserved. If you are interested in sending your children to attend classes with their Bahá'í friends, please contact us for the schedule and other information that you might need. -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 8:35 AM Subject: Re: Moral Education of the Children Steven Scholl ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- When I received a letter from a Baha'i Continental Counsellor indicating that I was under threat of being declared a Covenant-breaker, the impact on me personally was less than on my family. My wife is a Baha'i as are many of her family members, . . . The very real threat of being declared a Covenant breaker meant my wife had to face the decision of joining me as a heretic or divorcing me so that she could maintain her relationships with her family and other lifelong friends. Since [my wife] had no intention of divorcing me, the choices then extended out to her family. Her sister would not refuse to socialize with us so she would automatically be declared a covenant breaker along with her husband and children. Many of my close Baha'i friends would also be faced with the decision of maintaining friendships or joining me as a heretic. The whole thing is absurd and quite medieval. But it does raise the issue which you point out so well; how anyone would want to belong to a group which is willing to act this way and be so cruel is beyond me. That is why I voluntarily left the religion. Not in order to escape punishment but because the Baha'i community had become such an unhealthy place spiritually. I was terribly saddened that my spiritual home of 25 years had turned into a prison and nightmare. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl3.htm Quoted by Karen Bacquet in "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" [60] Scholl, Steven. (2000). April 26 post to talisman9@yahoogroups.com. See Steven Scholl's related comments: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mesbah" wrote in message news:PLYJ8.11210$qA.237265@news2.telusplanet.net... Moral Education of the Children "Against this gloomy backdrop of a decadent society, Bahá'í children should shine as the emblems of a better future." The Universal House of Justice Edmonton Mabel Pine Bahá'í School Mabel Pine Bahá'í School provides children with moral, spiritual, and social teachings of the Bahá'í Faith and maintains an environment for the children where their sense of "human honor" would be developed and preserved. If you are interested in sending your children to attend classes with their Bahá'í friends, please contact us for the schedule and other information that you might need. -- more... https://oneness-of-mankind.web-page.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 7:11 AM Subject: Re: Fundamentalism in US Baha'i Community I couldn't agree more.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Juan Cole" wrote in message news:619f1452.0205310812.2824fe41@posting.google.com... > But Matt, don't you think that if you lived in a society where > religious institutions became the civil government, that would be > Khomeinist. There isn't any real difference between komitehs of the > Party of God ruling society and LSAs and NSAs. > > I have lots of Iranian academic friends who were silenced or purged > for their writing because it was critical of the Khomeinist state. It > is actually illegal in Iran to contest the idea that the supreme > Shi`ite jurisprudent should rule the country. > > I don't see what the difference in principle is between that and the > Baha'i institutions claiming they can never be publicly criticized, > and sending counsellors and ABMs around to silence people with threats > that they will be shunned or ostracized. If the Baha'is who behave > this way controlled a government, they would be just as oppressive as > the Khomeinists. UHJ member Hushmand Fatheazam once told me that a > future Baha'i world government would put covenant breakers in jail! > > We all know where I would be if that sort of person controlled the US > government. > > So when you say you want to get away from Khomeinism, are you serious? > Because it would mean taking the theocrat party within the Baha'i > faith seriously, and dissociating yourself from them. > > cheers Juan Cole > > > > > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm > > > > Here's to getting as far away from Khomeinist Islam as possible. In > > Iran they hurt us by persecution. Everywhere else they hurt us by the > > embarassment of being associated with them. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Matt ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 6:50 AM Subject: Prof. Cole's New Article - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - Religious Studies Review 2002 For anyone interested in the bahai faith, let me mention that Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's History Department, has recently published an excellent article that discusses the fundamentalism that has become dominant within the bahai faith during the last few decades. Its exceedingly distrubing revelations highlight the many heresy trials, purges, and distortions that the extremists among my fellow bahais have been imposing upon bahais and non-bahais now for years. "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Religious Studies Review 2002 Professor Cole has written yet one more work that mightly defends Abdu'l-Baha's respect for freedom of conscience and speech. I recommend it to anyone interested in trying to understand what is actually taking place within the bahai faith today as the best brief introduction now available. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 7:01 AM Subject: Re: Prof. Cole's New Article - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - Religious Studies Review 2002 Excerpts from Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Religious Studies Review 2002: ...fundamentalism as an ideology gives Counselors and the UHJ far more practical power than does liberalism, which is thus seen as "undermining" that power. Given the centrality and authority of these Baha'i institutions, the ability of fundamentalists to capture them may be the most important explanation for the increasing hegemony of this tendency in the movement. **** At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is less open. Fundamentalists in the international center and their appointees in the "institutions of the learned" dislike the democratic system of governance, are committed to establishing an ultimate Baha'i theocracy, and wish to prohibit academic modes of discourse about the core areas of the religion. All of these themes, if widely adopted, would bring the religion into greater tension with the surrounding U.S. society. (The U.S. is after all a democracy committed to the separation of religion and state where nearly half of citizens go on to some form of higher education). Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:adi9fq$1198f1$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > For anyone interested in the bahai faith, let me mention that > Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's History Department, > has recently published an excellent article that discusses the > fundamentalism that has become dominant within the bahai faith > during the last few decades. Its exceedingly distrubing revelations > highlight the many heresy trials, purges, and distortions that the > extremists among my fellow bahais have been imposing upon > bahais and non-bahais now for years. > > "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm > Religious Studies Review 2002 > > Professor Cole has written yet one more work that mightly defends > Abdu'l-Baha's respect for freedom of conscience and speech. > > I recommend it to anyone interested in trying to understand what > is actually taking place within the bahai faith today as the best > brief introduction now available. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:55 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found." --Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:56 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but also freedom of *speech* and a democratic society." Juan Cole, December 03, 1997 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Freedom2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:56 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise be to God!--this is a house of worship [Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912] wherein conscientious opinion has free sway. Every religion and every religious aspiration may be freely voiced and expressed here. Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought, likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable. Therefore, this is a blessed church because its pulpit is open to every religion, the ideals of which may be set forth with openness and freedom." The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:57 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan. Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:57 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - "[To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. * * * Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án." A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:58 AM Subject: [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty , security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another,[SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people[TAB p. 492] https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:01 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." --Professor Juan Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:02 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty." [PUP p.52] https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:03 AM Subject: 64. O OPPRESSORS OF EARTH! - Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience 64. O OPPRESSORS OF EARTH! Withdraw your hands from tyranny, for I have pledged Myself not to forgive any man's injustice. This is My covenant which I have irrevocably decreed in the preserved tablet and sealed it with My seal of glory. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Tyranny.htm https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Justice.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:15 AM Subject: Excerpts from Prof Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" *** Religious Studies Review 2002 **** Excerpts from Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Religious Studies Review 2002: ...fundamentalism as an ideology gives Counselors and the UHJ far more practical power than does liberalism, which is thus seen as "undermining" that power. Given the centrality and authority of these Baha'i institutions, the ability of fundamentalists to capture them may be the most important explanation for the increasing hegemony of this tendency in the movement. **** At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is less open. Fundamentalists in the international center and their appointees in the "institutions of the learned" dislike the democratic system of governance, are committed to establishing an ultimate Baha'i theocracy, and wish to prohibit academic modes of discourse about the core areas of the religion. All of these themes, if widely adopted, would bring the religion into greater tension with the surrounding U.S. society. (The U.S. is after all a democracy committed to the separation of religion and state where nearly half of citizens go on to some form of higher education). Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:adi9fq$1198f1$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > For anyone interested in the bahai faith, let me mention that > Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan's History Department, > has recently published an excellent article that discusses the > fundamentalism that has become dominant within the bahai faith > during the last few decades. Its exceedingly distrubing revelations > highlight the many heresy trials, purges, and distortions that the > extremists among my fellow bahais have been imposing upon > bahais and non-bahais now for years. > > "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm > Religious Studies Review 2002 > > Professor Cole has written yet one more work that mightly defends > Abdu'l-Baha's respect for freedom of conscience and speech. > > I recommend it to anyone interested in trying to understand what > is actually taking place within the bahai faith today as the best > brief introduction now available. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:04 AM Subject: President George W. Bush's Speech at West Point President George W. Bush's words at West Point are equally applicable to the totalitarians on Mt. Carmel: "Because the war on terror will require resolve and patience, it will also require firm moral purpose. In this way our struggle is similar to the cold war. Now, as then, our enemies are totalitarians, holding a creed of power with no place for human dignity. Now, as then, they seek to impose a joyless conformity, to control every life and all of life." https://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/01/international/02PTEX-WEB.html?pagewanted=2 -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:54 AM Subject: TWO Comprehensive Articles on bahai Fundamentalism - Cole & Bacquet For those interested in understanding and making sense of what's taking place regarding the Bahai Wars, I urge you to read some of the primary material on my and Professor Cole's websites and decide for yourself. I especially recommend two articles: Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Along with Cole's survey, I also highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community": https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Together, Cole and Bacquet's articles provide a comprehensive view of fundamentalism within the bahai faith today and provide a thorough context within which to understand the claims of the various points of view represented on talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, AOL, and elsewhere. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 8:14 AM Subject: AOL - New Fundamentalist Tactic Some people here on AOL's bahai Message Boards are now speculating that the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have decided to kill these boards by NOT posting to them so that AOL will simply delete the entire system for lack of sufficient particpation. The IRONY is the fanatics have DRIVEN people off the boards by hounding and harassing them into oblivion! Those concerned about this latest tactic might want to post before it's too late! -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: bahai - FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship62002.Zip 17 megabytes OR What bahai Fanatics Don't Want You to Read.... bahai - FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship62002.Zip 17 megabytes zipped - 6/6/2002 Includes All Archives https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm BahaiCensorship2001CD version! 23 megabytes zipped 1/1/2002 https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 8:19 AM Subject: Re: SMOKING GUN - Re: AOL - New Fundamentalist Tactic would like an explanation WHY this post was deleted. What are you trying to hide and suppress, as though we don't all know.... ----- LDRS LFST Shahid Volunteer Message Board Leader Lifestyles Community ======== Copy of Your Message ======== Subject: Discussing about the lack of participation on this message board Date: 6/7/2002 7:27 PM Central Daylight Time From: Mr Mahdi Message-id: <20020607202737.01905.00000437@mb-fx.aol.com> I would like for the people here to discuss the reasons why the Bahai Message Board on AOL is becoming less active. We should also discuss what is needed to rectify the situation. I personally believe that certain people have been driven away from these boards. I remember these boards back in 1998 where it was EXTREMELY active. People were allowed to express their views and as a result, the boards had thousands of posts. Intellectual contributions were common and food for thought became something we saw everyday back then. But after a certain former leader returned from a hiatus, this message board had become a place of extreme double-standards and intolerance. Open but civil and intellectual discussions were being suppressed. Members even had their accounts canceled or at least suspended after posting non-TOSable messages because the content and the person posting did not sit well with the forum leader(s). For these and many other reasons, many members of AOL, including myself, decided to either post here less frequently or not post here at all. This is unfortunate because if this board was like the early days when I was on, it would be probably 100s of times more active and even beneficial for the readership. We need to start discussing the issues so that we can improve this message board before it is shutdown forever due to lack of participation. Mahdi Muhammad Frederick Glaysher www.google.com Search Engine: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience "BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing" wrote in message news:adrgkq$1qqsl$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > Subject: Re: What's this all about? > Date: 5/31/2002 12:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: LDRS LFST Shahid > Message-id: <20020531123112.07494.00000134@mb-bg.aol.com> > > > > > >What's going on with this folder? Just curious.... > > > > Dear Wendy, > > Glad you asked. The current standard for removal of folders is two weeks > with 10 postings or less. The reasoning is that with 25 million members, if > a folder cannot generate at least on post per day, then the subject/topic is > dead. This is very reasonable when you consider that many of our folders are > generating in excess of 20-50 posts per day and some are generating hundreds > of posts per day. > > However, because some of the communities are struggling to increase > activity, rather than remove these folders, they are moved to an "About to > leave us" folder where the membership can have another chance at > rejuvenating them. If the activity increases, they can be moved back to the > appropriate folder. If not, they will be permanently removed. > LDRS LFST Shahid > Volunteer Message Board Host > AOL Keyword: Baha'i > > > > > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:adqbgv$1gun4$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Some people here on AOL's bahai Message Boards are now speculating that > the > > fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have decided to kill these boards > by > > NOT posting to them so that AOL will simply delete the entire system for > > lack of sufficient particpation. The IRONY is the fanatics have DRIVEN > > people off the boards by hounding and harassing them into oblivion! > > > > Those concerned about this latest tactic might want to post before it's > too > > late! > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 6:39 AM Subject: Re: FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai $$$$$$$$$ FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ People with only web access might want to use https://groups.google.com/ It offers reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai An unmoderated Italian Bahai newgroup is now available: it.cultura.religioni.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Three years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech andconscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of TENS of THOUSANDS of Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/3rdRESULT.htm It should be noted that talk.religion.bahai eventually passed despite of the opposition of Bahais. The annotated RESULT may be read at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/3rdRESULT.htm The annotated NO voters list may be read at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/NOvoters3rd.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 6:41 AM Subject: Re: soc.religion.bahai CENSORSHIP - $$$$$$$$ soc.religion.bahai CENSORSHIP - soc.religion.bahai CENSORSHIP - https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb.htm Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998:"So many Bahais on these forumshave shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence."https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/censored2.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/srb.htm -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ See also for an excellent introduction to the Bahai Wars: Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 6:42 AM Subject: Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice $$$$$$$$ Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 6:43 AM Subject: bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 $$$$$$$$$ bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UNmenu.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship To understand the influence of the bahai faith on the United Nations, I suggest the reader might find it helpful to consider these documents in the following order: Doug Martin, member of the bahai universal house of justice on the United Nations: "In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so." {If interested in reading full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "UN" match case, several clicks into it)} Cf. Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm See then my messages on the bahai faith & the UN: uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm Bahai international community Abuses its Access to UN MF Mailing List 4/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/OneCountry.htm Note especially at the end that the bic abused its control over MFDiscuss@yahoo.com in order to suppress my informing other Forum members of its abuse. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin who holds such a fundamentalist interpretation of the bahai faith. Does the UN know the record of the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its own ranks? I would find it very worrisome if it does. My guess is that bahais at the UN, such as Techeste Ahderom, co-chair of the Millennium Forum and the principal bahai representative to the United Nations, dismiss concerns whenever they are raised by anyone within the Organization, essentially participating in deception. Brief History of Douglas Martin Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 6:14 AM Subject: Re: BI*P*GS@liberty.com is a troll. > "Mark Elderkin" wrote in message > news:adu1c9$e15$1@austar-news.austar.net.au... > > > > Dernut, The maligning of people's names shouldn't be done or condoned either. Many of the fundamentalists resort to using derogatory forms, apparently out of frustration, in their attempts to discredit people or make them appear ridiculous. It's quite reprehensible and clearly a pattern for some of them, tacitly supported by others. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 6:31 AM Subject: "Dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience - $$$ Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm See this article for an excellent introduction to the Bahai Wars: Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 6:53 AM Subject: Re: SMOKING GUN - Re: AOL - New Fundamentalist Tactic SEE below for the latest intrigue on AOL: > Some people here on AOL's bahai Message Boards are now speculating that the > fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have decided to kill these boards by > NOT posting to them so that AOL will simply delete the entire system for > lack of sufficient particpation. The IRONY is the fanatics have DRIVEN > people off the boards by hounding and harassing them into oblivion! > > Those concerned about this latest tactic might want to post before it's too > late! > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > Subject: Re: What's this all about? Date: 5/31/2002 12:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: LDRS LFST Shahid Message-id: <20020531123112.07494.00000134@mb-bg.aol.com> > >What's going on with this folder? Just curious.... > Dear Wendy, Glad you asked. The current standard for removal of folders is two weeks with 10 postings or less. The reasoning is that with 25 million members, if a folder cannot generate at least on post per day, then the subject/topic is dead. This is very reasonable when you consider that many of our folders are generating in excess of 20-50 posts per day and some are generating hundreds of posts per day. However, because some of the communities are struggling to increase activity, rather than remove these folders, they are moved to an "About to leave us" folder where the membership can have another chance at rejuvenating them. If the activity increases, they can be moved back to the appropriate folder. If not, they will be permanently removed. LDRS LFST Shahid Volunteer Message Board Host AOL Keyword: Baha'i "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:adt06b$233am$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > would like an explanation WHY this post was deleted. What are you trying to > hide and suppress, as though we don't all know.... > > > ----- > LDRS LFST Shahid > Volunteer Message Board Leader > Lifestyles Community > > ======== Copy of Your Message ======== > > Subject: Discussing about the lack of participation on this message board > Date: 6/7/2002 7:27 PM Central Daylight Time > From: Mr Mahdi > Message-id: <20020607202737.01905.00000437@mb-fx.aol.com> > > > I would like for the people here to discuss the reasons why the Bahai > Message Board on AOL is becoming less active. We should also discuss what > is needed to rectify the situation. > > I personally believe that certain people have been driven away from these > boards. I remember these boards back in 1998 where it was EXTREMELY active. > People were allowed to express their views and as a result, the boards had > thousands of posts. Intellectual contributions were common and food for > thought became something we saw everyday back then. > > But after a certain former leader returned from a hiatus, this message board > had become a place of extreme double-standards and intolerance. Open but > civil and intellectual discussions were being suppressed. Members even had > their accounts canceled or at least suspended after posting non-TOSable > messages because the content and the person posting did not sit well with > the forum leader(s). > > For these and many other reasons, many members of AOL, including myself, > decided to either post here less frequently or not post here at all. This > is unfortunate because if this board was like the early days when I was on, > it would be probably 100s of times more active and even beneficial for the > readership. > > We need to start discussing the issues so that we can improve this message > board before it is shutdown forever due to lack of participation. > > > Mahdi Muhammad > > > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher > www.google.com Search Engine: > Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > > "BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing" > wrote in message news:adrgkq$1qqsl$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Subject: Re: What's this all about? > > Date: 5/31/2002 12:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time > > From: LDRS LFST Shahid > > Message-id: <20020531123112.07494.00000134@mb-bg.aol.com> > > > > > > > > > >What's going on with this folder? Just curious.... > > > > > > > Dear Wendy, > > > > Glad you asked. The current standard for removal of folders is two weeks > > with 10 postings or less. The reasoning is that with 25 million members, > if > > a folder cannot generate at least on post per day, then the subject/topic > is > > dead. This is very reasonable when you consider that many of our folders > are > > generating in excess of 20-50 posts per day and some are generating > hundreds > > of posts per day. > > > > However, because some of the communities are struggling to increase > > activity, rather than remove these folders, they are moved to an "About > to > > leave us" folder where the membership can have another chance at > > rejuvenating them. If the activity increases, they can be moved back to > the > > appropriate folder. If not, they will be permanently removed. > > LDRS LFST Shahid > > Volunteer Message Board Host > > AOL Keyword: Baha'i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > news:adqbgv$1gun4$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > Some people here on AOL's bahai Message Boards are now speculating that > > the > > > fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have decided to kill these boards > > by > > > NOT posting to them so that AOL will simply delete the entire system for > > > lack of sufficient particpation. The IRONY is the fanatics have DRIVEN > > > people off the boards by hounding and harassing them into oblivion! > > > > > > Those concerned about this latest tactic might want to post before it's > > too > > > late! > > > > > > -- > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: More Beliefnet Shenanigans Karen, All VERY familiar.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:ug8i5co87fv2c6@corp.supernews.com... > Dear Pat, > > Since we've been talking here about the goings-on on Beliefnet, and the harm > caused by the fanatics who frequent the place, I couldn't help but think of > you when I saw the most recent fiasco. A seeker came to the main Baha'i > board, asking about the prophecy that the Baha'i dispensation would be "the > day not followed by night". A Remeyite answered, quoting Shoghi Effendi > about it meaning the continuing guidance of the line of Guardians. So our > friends Dust and Effy (who is Pith again now) reacted so hysterically that > this young lady was quite turned off -- then the board host moved the thread > to the "Twin Pillars" board, which so upset her that she is now hanging out > with American Baha'i in his territory. She said she wanted out of the UHJ > side of the Baha'i boards because of its "negative energy", and you know, I > couldn't blame her one single bit. With friends like this, the Cause > doesn't need enemies. I hope they're real happy with themselves, driving a > seeker straight into the arms of a Remeyite. > > You know, all those little splinter groups would have to do would be to stop > endlessly harping on the Guardianship, and open up a little bit, and they'd > have real growth potential -- just because of the bigotry and stupidity of > people who think they're loyal to the UHJ. > > Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > -- > "The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." -- > Baha'u'llah > Pat Kohli wrote in message > news:3D014EE3.EEC28AF5@ameritel.net... > > > > > > Karen Bacquet wrote: > > > > > . > > > > > > > > How would I know? I thought it was lucky that I found out > Pithy/Effie's > > > name. > > > > > > I knew his name because he let it drop he'd been booted off Baha'i > > > Studies -- I later found out it was because of "scholar-baiting" which > is > > > against the list rules there. > > > > > > > I was hoping he had just had the one thing and was going to finally clean > up his > > act. Oh well. > > > > > (snip) > > > > > > > > Probably. Although, if you remember, a more moderate person was trying > to > > > get the fundamentalists there to actually pay attention to what the > House > > > has said about Internet behavior, and they turned on him as being in > cahoots > > > with the liberals, just as they did you. > > > > David, Steve, or Rod? > > > > > However, Pith/Effy/Fred is quiet > > > these days -- no way to tell why, though. You're right that if he ever > got > > > called on the carpet by an ABM, he'd be unlikely to report it. > > > > > > > > > > > > These people are > > > > > far more harmful to the Faith than any liberal ever thought about > being. > > > > > > > > It is relative. To me they seem for more liberal than Fred, just as > > > > liberal as you or Juan. > > > > > > Um, you lost me there. > > > > > > > (shrug) It is one of those things that you see if you stand just so and > look off > > in just that way, so, I shouldn't expect you will see it. The thing is, > some of > > those folks on the outs with the AO, don't look particularly liberal to > me, and > > some of those who get all nasty to those they disagree with, don't seem > all that > > conservative. I understand we will disagree on 'who is a liberal'. D95 > seems > > very comfortable flaunting the guidance of the Master in the "Will and > > Testament". To me, this is a liberal interpretation, and therefore he > could be > > a liberal. That he has made himself memorable through tangential personal > > attacks against so many Baha'is, (NoW and Rod, to name just a few) does > not, in > > my mind make him conservative. Perhaps you have nailed the 'acid test' > though, > > a semblance of loyalty to the AO, through the appearance of no direct > > challenges. It is also possible that his 'doing things his own way and to > hell > > with the rest', is a challenge to the AO, and he just doesn't acknowledge > it, > > directly. Well, you are there on B-net, as a host (how could that > be??????), so > > you can see what happens. My guess is that if he did get counselled by > the AO, > > he would write about 'those so and soes w/ too much time on their hands, > making > > mischief for the D-meister' and, 'there was a time when being an ABM, or > even an > > assistant meant something and now any twit that falls off the apple cart > will > > shake their finger at the oh so low D-ness'. Let me know when he does get > his. > > > > > > > > Bad manners, and even an anti-social disposition does not 'place' > > > > someone on the liberal - moderate - conservative - reactionary > continuum. > > > Look > > > > at me! Some, are not themselves directly ill mannered, but are > tolerant, > > > and > > > > this leaves the impression that we have no discipline in our > community. > > > Most of > > > > the heavy complaints I read here, are of two much discipline - order > over > > > law. > > > > Sometimes, Rod's being a classic example, the complaint is this > atmosphere > > > of so > > > > much tolerance, some individuals can get away with being quite > abusive, > > > and the > > > > NM lawsuit seems to reflect a bit of this, too. > > > > > > What I see a problem with is the kind of behavior that provokes an AO > > > response -- it seems very personalized. Some people can get away with a > > > lot; others are called on the carpet for doing virtually nothing. > > > > If I were called to account for anything I did on the internet, I could > tell any > > counsellor, or any disillusioned Baha'i, that though I may have done some > stuff > > wrong, and someone else could have done it better, w/ God as my witness, I > could > > have done it w/ Baha'u'llah on my right and the Bab on my left, and maybe > I > > did. Years ago, I would never have reported misbehaving Baha'is to ABMs. > After > > time on the internet, where I have seen so much of it done right out in > public, > > I will. If people want to say 'you can't trust Kohli, he's a snitch', > fine; but > > anything done in plain view (not an email), is fair game. If someone > wants to > > bid adieu to a web board after being a rectal sphincter, and get a new > handle, > > and then three months latter get loud and call someone else a vampire, > flitting > > about in the night, I will let them have it. And even though unenrolled > folks > > have no AO to get reported to, when they make rectal sphincters of > themselves > > they will get 'it', too. Like Dirty Harry, I consdier myself an equal > > opportunity rectal sphincter. Only when people draw the line, does a > standard > > get enforced. > > > > > > > > > Again, when would I hear about that? Mr. Self Appointed VoG is very > > > likely to > > > > get abruptly corrected in public when he does his thing in public. > But he > > > > doesn't even post here. > > > > > > This was the most serious case, because this guy was abusing his power, > and > > > there had complaints about him for years that went unanswered -- to the > > > point a lawsuit was filed. Last I heard, the complainant in that > lawsuit > > > has been assured that the "situation is being addressed". > > > > > > > I've seen people, even other than myself, wax fat headed at a local > convention, > > and get politely cut off at the knees. If he lived out here, and told 200 > > Baha'is he was the VoG, he would earn the humiliation of hearing quite > clearly > > that God had spoken in the nineteenth century and that is the _only_ voice > of > > God that we Baha'is would even listen to! And I'd look him dead in the > eye > > while I spoke into the microphone! "situation is being addressed"? > > > > The guy plays the psycho, he gets told to take his lithium, next case! > > > > > > > > Imagine, though, some guy with the handle "hq" posts > > > > here about how he was publically humilated at a district convention, > by an > > > > assistant for protection. How long w/ him hainging around you online > > > before you > > > > figure out he is "Hurting in 'Querque" because the Baha'is don't heed > his > > > call? > > > > There are people who have legitimate complaints, I'm sure, but when he > > > gets his, > > > > and does whine about it, the only way you know he had it coming, maybe > > > even > > > > earned it, is because you heard the other side of the story first. > > > > > > Hey, Pat, I've asked about "the other side of the story" concerned the > > > liberal cases, and all I get is silence or bullshit.(btw, I finally did > get > > > answer to my query to the NSA about Dialogue -- they just told me I > didn't > > > sufficiently understand Baha'i principles.) I spent a long time trying > to > > > find out what was so horrible about the people who got in trouble, and > would > > > have been ready to revise my opinion if I'd found anything solid. I > never > > > found squat. Anyway, I'm not advocating the public humiliation of > anyone -- > > > Mr. Voice of God is as entitled to due process as anyone else. > > > > Rod has complained that his community has forced him to tolerate abuse > from a > > community member who slanders him. Nothing gets done about Rod's > complaints > > maybe because he is sane. Is that a 'liberal' case? Fred Glaysher gets > dropped > > from the rolls. Is that a liberal case? > > > > People humiliate themselves in public, no one can do that for them. When > > someone tells Mr. VoG, politely tells Mr. VoG that he has no reason to > hang w/ > > us, and no clue, if he want to tell Baha'is that he is the VoG, it really > is not > > the humiliation; that was already done when he walked out in public having > peeed > > himself. > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know when the > > > > > guy in Britain who's going around teaching that Baha'u'llah is God > who > > > sent > > > > > the rest of the Messengers is summarily disenrolled for > "aggressively > > > > > disseminating misconceptions" about the Teachings. > > > > > > > > Not only do I not know that guy's name, I can't even relate him to > some > > > lawsuit, > > > > or incident I witnessed. I'm guessing the ABM and/or assistant has > > > already told > > > > them they are rocking the boat? > > > > > > Not that I've heard. I've only recently been told his name privately, > but > > > I'd heard about this case before on Baha'i Studies. He's collected > quite a > > > following among the Persians in Britain, and the impression I get is > that > > > he's been doing this for a good while now. Now, I'm the last person to > > > advocate someone getting in trouble for their theological views, however > > > wacky. But imagine what would happen if a liberal started identifying > the > > > Maid of Heaven with God, and collected a following -- they'd move pretty > > > rapidly, I suspect. It's not a matter that I think this guy should be > > > punished, but of fairness. What I'm seeing is that you can be as kooky > as > > > you want to be as long as you give lip-service to the idea of obedience > to > > > the Institutions, while those who present well-thought-out ideas that > might > > > challenge what is perceived to be their authority are toast. It's like > it's > > > the administration that is sacred -- everything else is dispensible. > > > > Aha! This is a much better acid test than pleasantness or 'the > Manifestation as > > the person of God, or the Unmanifest as the Person of God' or 'the > Mainfestation > > as very god'. Yet, there are some who clearly overdo it, like the > original > > Monseiur Chauvin. It seems to me the AO overdo, as in "the House should > never > > be questioned" is just as bad as the underdo, as in, "I don't have to do > what > > they say, because they have no Guardian". You may be right that w/in the > AO, > > the overdo is more acceptable than the underdo, but I find them equally > weak. > > > > Blessings! > > - Pat > > kohli@ameritel.net > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 5:51 AM Subject: Re: More Beliefnet Shenanigans "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:ug9dnah0ae2dbf@corp.supernews.com... > More than one seeker who has come to those > boards has been turned off by the fundamentalism they find there -- and the > fundamentalists blame everybody but themselves. So true - here as well as on BeliefNet, AOL, everywhere in bahai cyberspace, I dare say. You're quite right that everyone else is blamed with little to no real humility and soul-searching apparently going on by the fundamentalists. I've watched this online for nearly six years now, SIX! Appalling, really. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 7:02 AM Subject: What Does It Mean to Be a Baha'i? "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$09lixg$0i21$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Fred, as far as I am concerned, is providing an invaluable service to the > general public by providing information to the community at large and not > allowing the issues to die or be buried under the rug as the Baha'i > fundamentalists would ardently wish them to be. In my book, he's a true > believer, and tough luck to those who think otherwise! > Nima, I appreciate your saying all of the above. I would like to think I'm a true believer, in the best moderate sense, not that of Eric Hoffer. Only God knows the soul, as Abdu'l-Baha says, "Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Likewise I take solace in "If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy...." Abdu'l-Baha, SAQ, 215. I feel it is my duty as a Baha'i to share with my fellow Baha'is and citizens what has and is actually taking place within bahai circles versus the many distortions and dishonesties that now run rife throughout the isolated bahai world. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 7:06 AM Subject: Re: More Beliefnet Shenanigans "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:ugbot5ldmm0mad@corp.supernews.com... > > However, I'm still Baha'i enough that I would regret to see the splits that > exist in the Faith become major schisms. I'd far rather see constructive > change, as faint a hope as that may be. > Faint, indeed. I see no evidence that the administration, in the grip of fundamentalism, has the spiritual capacity to handle effectively any degree of change whatsoever. Entrenchment has long been their only response. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 10:42 AM Subject: Re: More Beliefnet Shenanigans "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:rgoN8.15439$gs4.8354@nwrddc02.gnilink.net... This brings up the possibility of > Haifan Baha'is taking a more aggressive approach to the groups they term > "covenant breakers" and the possibility of arrests and imprisonment for > enemies of the faith in any nation where credence is given to Haifan claims. > > Perhaps this is the only type of occurrence which could lead to necessary > Haifan reforms. > I'm not convinced that even such oppression would lead to reform. Professor Juan Cole is too optimistic in my view too when he says in his new Fundamentalism article that "The signs are, then, that conservative Baha'i are beginning to back off from what some adherents see as undue intervention in individual email correspondence." https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm There are no such significant signs my opinion, quite the reverse. It is very easy to underestimate the recalcitrance and arrogance of the prevailing fundamentalists now in control. Cole himself states what is widely known: that former nsa member Daniel Jordan was a liberal. However, Cole errs in referring to his "death." Jordan's *MURDER* was referred to as a professonal execution style murder in the press in 1982. I am not convinced that Jordan didn't find out or know something that some fanatic, with or without the approval of the bahai administration, felt had to be suppressed. Since it remains an unsolved murder, nothing should be ruled out, especially given the administration's actions throughout the Bahai Wars. Only real and substantive EVIDENCE will ever convince me that significant change is or has taken place. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 6:21 AM Subject: Religious Studies Review - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 See Professor Juan Cole's article for an excellent introduction to the Bahai Wars: "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm "There are two problems for Baha'i fundamentalists. The first, already noted, is that Baha'u'llah's own writings, and those of `Abdu'l-Baha are frankly anti-theocratic. The second is that in Baha'i law, oral traditions are supposed to be discounted in favor of written texts. Fundamentalists thus tend to retreat into generalities when explaining their belief, since they lack scriptural support." -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 7:26 AM Subject: Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights >authors of the sweeping study entitled EMPIRE I'd have to put them in the same cadre as Eric Hobsbawn.... Given the radicalization of many, i.e., utopianism, prudence may be in order on many fronts. Generalizations never tell the whole story. Take a look at the UN's Global Compact. There are many businesses that do not fulfill the goofy cliches of left-wing "intellectuals": https://www.unglobalcompact.org/ -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$7drtxg$k8b1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > As far as multinational corporations are concerned, you are right, the > East/West distinction is no longer an applicable category. Michael Hardt and > Antonio Negri, the veritable theoreticians of the anti-globalization > movement and authors of the sweeping study entitled EMPIRE, state the same > thing. In any case I don't believe the issue is necessarily about the UN. If > the UN actually had more power and was able to be more consistent with its > charter of principles, it stands to reason that globalization would take on > a less sinister turn. As it stands, though, multinational corporations are > increasingly seeing themselves and acting as if they are above governments > and any vestige of national or international law. For instance, most people > are unaware that the several countries who are currently lingering on the > final ratification of the International Criminal Court - the US leading the > anti-ratification fray - are doing so apparently because of certain > business interests actively lobbying against it (namely, business' tied to > arms contractors). > > > -- > Freethought110 > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:aei257$72ho1$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > My point is excessive rhetoric doesn't do justice to the > > complexity of such issues. > > > > I lived for over a year and half in Japan; traveled all > > over China, including Beijing, Hong Kong, SHEN ZHEN > > (the "miracle" economic city), Taiwan, etc. The "East" > > has plenty of exploitative corporations that have nothing > > to do with the West. Ever hear of Singapore? Malaysia? > > India? And so on. > > > > Yes, globalization, in the hands of some, is definitely > > an appalling exploitation of local peoples. Yes, some > > corporations are unethical in the extreme. The West is > > not always the culprit. > > > > I'm for distinctions. There are many worth making. > > > > I don't see the Baha'i Writings as against making > > money. They're not utopian in the radical marxist > > sense or whatever, though "Century of Light" is > > absurd for its use of Eric Hobsbawn, which says > > a lot about another way in which LACK of freedom > > of speech and conscience CORRUPTS the uhj.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > news:newscache$zjtrxg$71a1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > No, not all business' in the West are multinational corp's or corrupt. > But > > > most multinational corp's are headquartered in the West and it is > several > > of > > > these that are the problem. And this isn't about politically correct > > > rhetoric, Fred. There are big business' who have scorched the earth, > > > especially near the Amazon and the offshore, albeit the people doing the > > > actual deforestation have been subsidiaries of this companies. > > > > > > -- > > > Freethought110 > > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > > news:aeg2fj$6pkjk$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > > I said there haven't been abuses nor that global trends > > > > haven't produced some very real problems. It's false, > > > > though, to say it's all "Western" businesses involved > > > > and to ignore the benefits from many multinational > > > > corporations. > > > > > > > > When the administration deals in these cliches it's > > > > not better than on the politically correct race front > > > > or whatever, in my view. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > > > news:newscache$q2vqxg$v991$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > > > What do you call deforestation or drilling/mining in environmental > > > > protected > > > > > zones, to name but a few. It's not governments doing it, either. For > > > > > instance, the three big US corporations (who shall remain unnamed) > > have > > > > been > > > > > sued on a number of occasions now and facts have revealed that they > > have > > > > > been one of the main culprits via business conduits in S.America of > > > amazon > > > > > deforestation, to name just one of the instances of these > > multinational > > > > > companies environmental malefeasances. > > > > > > > > > > Globalization has so far not been all around good thing. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Freethought110 > > > > > > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > > > > news:aef4ag$6ga8d$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > > > > In my view that's a cliche about corporations. There's > > > > > > nothing wrong, in and of itself, in making money. Many > > > > > > corporations have significantly contributed to their > > > > > > host countries and definitely raised standards of many > > > > > > kinds. You might look at the UN's business > > > > > > partnership website. That other corporations have > > > > > > exploited is nothing unique to Western civilization. > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue is more complex. Few serious and > > > > > > reputable business people are attempting to > > > > > > "scorch the earth." > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > > > > > news:newscache$xtzpxg$lw81$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > > > > > Well, Fred, arguably it isn't even about the UN or governments > but > > > > about > > > > > > > multinational corporations and their global agendas in making > > > money, > > > > > most > > > > > > > of whom are in fact European and American companies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Freethought110 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > > > > > > > news:aeco81$5psvr$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > > > > > > > "Freethought110" wrote in > message > > > > > > > > news:newscache$ft3pxg$5f61$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > > > > > > > Of course, the world government being formulated presently > is > > > one > > > > > > mainly > > > > > > > > > composed of Western and particularly American corporations > who > > > are > > > > > > bent > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > scorching the earth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh come on, Nima.... How is the UN ever going to evolve > > > > > > > > further if all sides don't move beyond the cliches of the West > > > > > > > > AND East.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > > > > > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > > > > > > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 9:25 AM Subject: Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$kkouxg$2nb1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:aekkfv$7l7tj$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > >authors of the sweeping study entitled EMPIRE > > > > I'd have to put them in the same cadre as Eric Hobsbawn.... > > Given the radicalization of many, i.e., utopianism, > > prudence may be in order on many fronts. > > What would you call Jurgen Habermas, then? He shares the same concerns and > he is hardly a utopian, his former affiliation with Frankfurt School Marxism > notwithstanding. Or, say, the late Hans-Georg Gadamer, a student of > Heidegger's? Ditto. I did not intend to imply that I share entirely the conservative evaluation of the ICC. > > > Generalizations never tell the whole story. Take a look > > at the UN's Global Compact. There are many businesses > > that do not fulfill the goofy cliches of left-wing "intellectuals": > > > > https://www.unglobalcompact.org/ > > Many businesses do not, but many more multinational corps do. Stroll over > south of the border some time, as far south as you can go into the interior > of Mexico, and come back and tell me how great NAFTA has worked for the > rural economies of Mexico, to just cite one example. The world is a freakin > mess, Fred, and there are wealthy groups of multi-nat companies who are make > a financial killing out of the whole thing! This is no cliche. This is a > cold, hard fact. Don't forget the Carribean, machinadoras, etc. Generalizations lumping all corporations together are not helpful and haven't made much progress for decades, in my view. Much abuse exists, yes. The "West" is not alone in that. The world has always been a mess.... Baha'is merely repeating the left-wing cliches and prejudices do nothing distinctively different, do not demonstrate they have anything worthwhile to offer.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 7:39 PM Subject: Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$6vaxxg$sjd1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > "Baha'is merely repeating the left-wing cliches and prejudices do nothing > distinctively different, do not demonstrate they have anything worthwhile to > offer...." > > Of course they have nothing to offer. They're part of the problem. And as > far as leftwing cliches go, I think officially the Baha'is stopped doing > that awhile ago. Not in my opinion. Much of the propaganda is still repeating the prevailing line rather than allowing free speech and discussion to evolve into a distinctively Baha'i vision of such dilemmas. Now they sound off more neo-con cliches and look and feel > like the GOP's religious lobby. Yes, they do, at times. But I would say, so did Baha'u'llah, who also sounded like a liberal, at times.... Rather than the adminstrative interpretation of his writings, I'd much prefer the dynamism of the open struggle of his servants attempting to understanding together what he has wrought.... Neither the liberal nor conservative label does him justice. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 7:41 AM Subject: Re: OUT OFF TOPIC Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights I'd say you've got one polarity there and all the cliches. That the uhj has thrown its hat into that ring isn't going to help it. I mentioned the other polarity earlier: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/ -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:51 AM Subject: Re: OUT OFF TOPIC Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights A relevant article: Times Literary Supplement. Not Fading Away Yet: How British Identity Survived the Declinist Intelligentsia. June 7, 2002. Includes a couple of fine barbs for Eric Hobsbawm, the uhj's favorite UK radical, as mentioned, in the "Century of Light." Time to add a particular email address to my message rules again. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Adelard R" wrote in message news:aesok7$9h75s$1@ID-75457.news.dfncis.de... ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:54 AM Subject: Re: OUT OFF TOPIC Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights Incidentally, those interested in Eric Hobsbawn, a guiding light of the bahai fundamentalist uhj, might want to read the reviews below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship https://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9511/reviews/bacevich.html Voice of the Old Left The Age of Extremes: A History of the World, 1914-1991. By Eric Hobsbawm. Pantheon Books. 627 pp. $30. Reviewed by A. J. Bacevich Eric Hobsbawm ranks among the most prolific and most influential British historians of the entire postwar era. He is also a person who, throughout his long career, has without apology identified himself as a man of the left. So he remains today. For Hobsbawm, history is the continuation of politics by other means. In exploring the past, the historian's true purpose is to shape the future. Thus, whether acknowledged or not, real history, serious history, is always deeply political. Neither predisposed to avoid controversy nor willing to confine himself to arid subjects of antiquarian interest, Hobsbawm makes no pretense of dispassionate objectivity. His is political history in the grand manner: he appropriates the largest canvas within reach and attacks it with bold, slashing interpretative strokes. And Hobsbawm appears to relish controversy. His overall aim is less to inform the ignorant or to enlighten the befuddled than to rally the like-minded and to antagonize the opposition. Among Hobsbawm's best-known works is a trilogy on the "long nineteenth century," his term for the period from 1789 to 1914 during which European influence reached seemingly unassailable heights. The Age of Extremes forms a sequel to that trilogy, charting the course of what Hobsbawm has labeled the "short twentieth century" extending from the outbreak of World War I (and the ensuing demise of Europe) through the end of the Cold War-a history, not incidentally, of Hobsbawm's own time. This is a deeply personal account. Although the narrator seldom intrudes directly into the story, Hobsbawm's version of the "short century" revolves to a large extent around the great controversies that animated the era's myriad progressives, social revolutionaries, and proponents of secular utopia-in short, the sundry groups that comprise the modern left with which Hobsbawm has aligned himself and that (with few exceptions) derived singular inspiration from the upheaval that in 1917 overturned the old order in Russia and gave birth to that beacon of social justice and humanitarian virtue, the Soviet Union. The Age of Extremes can best be understood as a testimonial to that left, Hobsbawm's effort to explain how such a worthy enterprise has now ended in abject and humiliating failure, its ideals discredited, its vast pretensions demolished. Above all, in recounting the "short twentieth century's" descent into barbarism, Hobsbawm seeks to absolve the left of any responsibility for the era's various horrors and to refute any suggestion that the Grand Cause itself might have been from the very outset misguided, if not inherently malignant. It's a tough case to make, one requiring both bravado and guile. Hobsbawm offers plenty of both. He regales his reader with tales of his heroes: "the noble Ho Chi Minh," "the pacifically-minded Khrushchev," and, of course, "Fidel"-"strong and charismatic [and] determined to demonstrate personal bravery and to be a hero of whatever cause of freedom against tyranny." Hobsbawm acknowledges, but cannot quite bring himself to condemn, the crimes of Joseph Stalin. To do so would undermine his overall depiction of the Soviet Union as brave and admirable, unappreciated and willfully misunderstood. Thus, he advises, "the victory over Hitler's Germany was essentially won, and could only have been won, by the Red Army." (Emphasis added.) Having thus delivered the world from the scourge of fascism, communism next proceeded to save capitalism from itself "by providing it with the incentive, fear, to reform itself after the Second World War." Such fear on the part of the West was, of course, quite misplaced, since the Soviet Union at war's end yearned for nothing so much as to sustain "the framework of the all-embracing anti-fascist alliance, i.e., it looked forward to a long-term coexistence, or rather symbiosis, of capitalist and Communist systems." Responsibility for the ensuing Cold War thus rests squarely upon the West (above all, upon the United States), which whipped itself into a frenzy over "the supposed Soviet threat." That such a threat never existed, according to Hobsbawm, is patently obvious. Stalin entertained no imperial aspirations. There was no Soviet monolith, merely "a consortium of Communist states, organized around the Soviet Union." (Did the residents of, say, Budapest in 1956 or Prague in 1968 somehow misconstrue the privileges accruing to them as members of this consortium? On this point, Hobsbawm is silent.) Wherever its political influence extended beyond its own borders, the USSR was "specifically committed to [building] mixed economies under multiparty parliamentary democracies." Moreover, the economic and technological superiority of the West was from the outset so evident that for the capitalist bloc to feel challenged by communism was clearly absurd. The Cold War, "from the start, was a war of unequals." Thus, if we are to believe Hobsbawm, the Soviet Union was simultaneously so mighty that it alone possessed the strength to crush Nazi Germany and so benign and so weak that mindless hysteria along could explain why anyone would suspect Stalin's peaceful intentions. And so it goes: that "passionate reformer" Mikhail Gorbachev is commended for singlehandedly extricating the world from the jaws of the Cold War; Israel is stigmatized and then quickly dismissed as simply a "new anti-Arab state"; the Catholic Church is repeatedly denounced for siding with the forces of political reaction against the forces of enlightenment. Indeed, Hobsbawm's antipathy for virtually all religion forms a recurrent underlying theme. Were The Age of Extremes merely an apology for the left, it would be of limited interest. To the author's credit, his book is much more than that. According to Hobsbawm, future generations contemplating the furious ideological rows that fixed the attention of elites in the decades after 1917 may well wonder what all the fuss was about-not that the arguments over fascism or communism were pointless, but that in the long run they will turn out to be of less consequence than the massive technological, social, and cultural changes that have so transformed global society during the short twentieth century. The result, Hobsbawm argues, is that the world in which democratic capitalism has triumphed is, in fact, a world on the brink of profound crisis. That Hobsbawm all too predictably attributes that crisis entirely to the crimes and excesses of capitalism is a point that need not detain us. That the maladies to which he points do indeed constitute a crisis of historic proportions is an argument that merits thoughtful consideration. Many items in his bill of particulars-recurring episodes of unspeakable violence and savagery decades after civilized peoples proclaimed "never again," growing desperation throughout much of the so- called Third World, the malaise of affluent societies suffering from the increasing "privatization of life" and the growth of "consumer egoism," the inadequacy and corruption of politics even in mature democracies, the diminished capacity of established institutions to respond to the challenges that they face-transcend ideology. Hobsbawm is on to something: with regard to the problems confronting mankind today, there is something different, larger, and particularly frightening. To turn to Hobsbawm and his colleagues on the Old Left for a remedy to those problems, however, would be hazardous if not downright reckless. They have had their moment and the world is still tallying up the cost of the havoc they wreaked. Yet the collapse of the left's visions for a secular utopia-however welcome-does not detract from the validity of its critique. Rather, the very depth of that failure might remind us that the ultimate solution to our present crisis-if solution there be-is likely to be found not in the realm of politics but in the realm of the spirit. A.J. Bacevich is Executive Director of the Foreign Policy Institute at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. May 22, 2001 The New World Trade Order - The Decisive Importance Of The Non-traded sector https://www.indiainfoline.com/nevi/thne.html Eric Hobsbawn has written a book recently on the "New Century" where he clearly establishes what kind of changes the new century will witness. Man has been sailing seas and crossing mountains ever since he has emerged upon this world as an intelligent species. We have had ancient voyages and mediaeval trade routes and at the turn of the modern era with Vasco da Gama and Columbus, momentous journeys in geographical discovery. We have had, all over the world, at least two centuries of colonialism, where the resources of the colonised nation continuously fed the industries and commerce of the master nation. All of these events since time immemorial have taken place on a global scale. Then, where is the singularity or uniqueness of the globalisation which we are experiencing now? Eric Hobsbawn says that the present globalisation is unique because this time, it is neither trade nor conquest, but a reorganisation of production upon the rational calculations of global optima which purports to bring about an integration of the world as never before. Therefore, it is likely that the resources will flow across the globe to settle into countries where they can perform in the most competitive manner. In the days of Schumpeter, i.e. in the sixties, technological sophistication was directly related to competitiveness of manufactures. But in the present world of standardised technology as well as of freely available knowledge and very mobile skilled persons, the advantages due to technical competence no longer belongs specifically to nations. What belong specifically to nations are other things which cannot be separated or even be traded by nations. These, in terms of economics will be called as non-tradeables and include water and power supply, other civic amenities, political stability, compliance with the more standardised rules of the WTO and a general work ambience of the country. Such items and these items cannot be traded, nor can they be accounted for but they constitute very crucial conditions for competitiveness in the traded goods (manufacturing, agriculture and services) to take effect. In the days of globalisation, it is really not important to know how much a nation trade and what it trades in, but how much of resources from all over the world it has been able to attract towards itself. This is because, the bulk of a nation's wealth would come from its production, and trade is important because it makes the nation concentrate upon what it produces the best. Presently, nations are likely to vie with each other in order to attract more and more resources towards themselves so that international capital, knowledge and skills flow within their boundaries generating income and wealth. In the post-capitalist phase, or the advanced capitalist phase, which started roughly around the mid-50's, was that it was no longer important as to who owned the capital as much as the fact who controlled it. Daniel Bell, a leading American sociologist said that production needs to be controlled by the educated, intelligent, informed and innovative persons and not by the ones who merely have the wealth to invest. Thus started a long phase of the importance of "control of capital", where managers became more important than the industrialists who owned business. Such a separation between control and ownership of capital came into existence due to the intensification of knowledge and skills into production. In the days of globalisation, it is important to realise that knowledge and skills may become relatively easy to access and acquire. Most of our innovations are well-documented and technology and skills themselves have become traded commodities. What remains as the "cutting edge" or the differentiating factor is the non-traded sector - infrastructure. If infrastructure is supposed to create all the difference to the competitiveness of industries, then neither ownership, nor control, but the location of production sites will become important. Managers can be posted anywhere and skilled labour can migrate, but the stationary factor, infrastructure will become the most deciding factor for a country's wealth in the years to come. This means that every country will want to improve its chances of attracting investments and in order to do this they will try their level best to have the best of sanitations, best of environmental purity, the best of power supply and so on. Health and education, two most important factors in the employability of labour would also become engaging political considerations. What impact will this have on the nations' production structures? It may be easily deduced that with such an importance on the infrastructure, the best of the nation's resources will shift towards the production of such non-tradeables, like road construction, schools, education, information technology, environmental control and so on. But the problem with these non-tradeables is that they are most of the times commercially unviable - the full user cost will be very difficult to recover from a country like India and many such developing economies. Then how will the government or the investor ever hope to get back the funds. The only way one can realise the investments into infrastructure projects is through the very long winded indirect effect where the investor hopes that with improved infrastructure, more investments will come into the country which will raise the income of the people and with which they will either buy the firm's utilities, in case the firm is in the private sector, or they will pay tax, if the investor is the government. This is why, in the economic policies of nations as well as the investments into infrastructure go hand in hand with the openness towards foreign capital. Investments into infrastructure cannot be profitable without a large inflow of investments. If this large inflow of investments take place out of indigenous resources, then it is fine. But if the domestic entrepreneurs do not come forth with their investments then, one must keep one's doors open to the foreign investments. In other words, foreign investments are intricately linked to the investments into infrastructure. Therefore, the future of globalisation is likely to see an increase in the production of non-traded goods all over the world. This will be because the non-traded sector will serve as the condition of success for the traded sector. The non-traded sector requires a very large amount of surplus because its costs are not always directly recoverable. In the macro-scenario, such costs can only be recovered from increased sale of the traded goods. In other words, the traded sector must heavily cross-subsidise the non-traded sector. This will make more and more demands on the traded sector to become profitable and competitive, capture larger and larger market share and add more value to the customer. It is true that we may assign the increase in global competition to the harder pressures on the commodity sector in particular and the traded sector in general, but when seen wholistically, the need for competitiveness of the traded sector lies precisely in the fact that it must now subsidise the non-traded sector. According to Andre Gunder Frank and Samir Amin, leading economists of the 60's and the 80's respectively, the world production was likely to get divided and specialised. One set of nations would continue to produce less value-added products, while the other countries would continue to produce the higher value-added products. The first set would be the developing countries, while the latter would be the developed countries. The theories said that even when both grew in terms of value-addition, the developing countries would still be producing goods which were relatively less in value-addition in comparison to the developed countries. In the present context, the relationship between the countries may reverse and the extent of reversal will depend on how far the traded sector in every country subsidises the non-traded sector. One of the most certain ways for generating a surplus in the traded sector is to relocate industries - closer to outsourced units, closer to sources of power and water, closer to centres of consumption. All of such efforts are likely to reduce costs, increase value for the customers and in effect, corner a larger market share for itself. This is why, the world is increasingly likely to see intra-regional trade than interregional trade, trade which takes place due to the relocation of plants seeking facilities rather than specific resources. The global players of steel are increasing getting interested in channelising their sales into a particular country through service centres and other auxiliary facilities such that the final costs of the commodity when it reaches the final customer may be contained. Trade will now take place more in terms of relocation as well as get concentrated within regions. This will not happen due to a rising economic regionalism, as it is many a times made out to be, but will happen more out of a definite economic need to maximise its subsidisation to the non-traded sector. Susmita Dasgupta https://www.en.monde-diplomatique.fr/1999/12/05hobsbawm Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991 was published in Great Britain in 1994 and in the United States shortly after. It was soon published in all the main international languages - except one. It has appeared in German, Spanish and Portuguese (in both European and American editions), Italian, Chinese (in both Taiwanese and Mainland characters), Japanese, and Arabic. A Russian edition was soon underway. Editions were also in progress in all the state languages of the European Union - except one - and in the languages of most ex-communist states of central and eastern Europe (Polish, Czech, Hungarian, Rumanian, Slovene, Serbocroat, Albanian). But not, until October, in French. Unlike publishers in Lithuania (with 3.7 million inhabitants), Moldavia (4.3 million) and Iceland (270,000), publishers in France (with its population of 58.4 million) did not apparently consider it feasible, or desirable, to translate Age of Extremes into their national language. Yet the book was considered of sufficient importance for the review Le Debat (January-February 1997) to devote almost 100 pages to a critical symposium on it - including several pages by eminent French publishers explaining why the book could not be published in France. But for the initiative of Le Monde Diplomatique and a Belgian publisher, it would still not be accessible to the French-speaking world. The resistance of French publishers, alone among those of some 30 countries, to translating Age of Extremes is curious. The author is not the only one to find it surprising. Most of my earlier books were translated into French and some, indeed, have recently been republished in France. I had certainly not expected the publishers of the three volumes of my history of the 19th century - still in print - to refuse, without comment or explanation, to publish Age of Extremes, which completes the series. Was it probable that this book (unlike my earlier French titles) would have lost money, as French publishers have suggested? To judge by its reception and sales in all the countries in which it has been published, lack of public interest is unlikely. The collective failure of French publishers to publish the present book calls for some explanation. Anti-Marxist bias The most concise explanation comes from an American academic journal that specialises in surveying intellectual debates and scandals, Lingua Franca: "Twenty-five years ago", observes Tony Judt, a historian at New York University, "Age of Extremes would have been translated in a week. So what has changed? Three forces have apparently conspired to keep the book out of translation: the growth of a vituperative anti-Marxism among French intellectuals; a budget squeeze in humanities publishing; and, not least, a publishing community either unwilling or afraid to defy these trends" (1). That the present book appeared shortly before the late François Furet's highly successful Le Passé d'une Illusion, an "equally ambitious treatment of 20th century history and one considerably closer to current Paris taste in its treatment of Soviet communism", may, says Judt, have "made French publishers wary of coming out with a work like Hobsbawm's". A similar explanation was offered by the new Newsletter of the Committee on Intellectual Correspondence sponsored by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Wissenschaftskolleg in Berlin and the Suntory Foundation in Japan (2). Current Parisian intellectual fashion, it argues, would find Hobsbawm's unrepentant position on the left "something of an embarrassment". This is also the view of Pierre Nora of Gallimard in an authoritative and lucid account of the situation as seen by a French publisher. All the publishers, he says, "whether they want to or not, are obliged to take into account the intellectual and ideological circumstances in which they publish. There are serious reasons to think . that [Hobsbawm's] book would appear in an unfavourable intellectual and historical climate. Which explains the unwillingness to take chances." France was "the longest and most deeply Stalinised country". Thus "decompression", when it came, "accentuated hostility to anything that could from near or far recall that former pro-Soviet, pro-communist age, including plain Marxism. Eric Hobsbawn cultivates this attachment to the revolutionary cause, even if at a distance, as a point of pride . But in France at this moment, it goes down badly" (3). It is not clear whether, or to what extent, the publisher himself feels part of that France where the author's attitude "goes down badly". In the light of such arguments readers might expect Age of Extremes to be - like Furet's Le Passé d'une illusion - essentially an extended political or ideological polemic. It was not written as such. It is not the same kind of book at all, as readers will immediately discover. It asks to be judged on its merits as a comprehensive history of the 20th century (and the final volume of a series, begun many years ago, which together constitutes a history of the world since the late 18th century Age of Revolution). It has been recognised and taken seriously as such in countries whose regimes and intellectual fashions differ as widely as China and Taiwan, Israel and Syria, Canada, South Korea and Brazil, not to mention the US. Much to the financial satisfaction of author and publishers, it has also been very widely sold - and read - in three continents. One may observe in passing that publishers in countries at least as profoundly "Stalinised" in their time as France, and exposed to an even more dramatic "decompression" - namely the ex-communist states - have not hesitated to publish the book. (In communist times my historical works were never published in Russia, Poland or Czechoslovakia). The publication of a French translation of Age of Extremes now make it possible to discover whether reviewers and the intelligent reading public in France are really as different from those of other countries as Pierre Nora's unflattering assessment of the intellectual state of France suggests. It will also allow readers to judge another argument which has been privately used to justify the continued refusal to publish Age of Extremes in France - namely that by the time a translation was made, the book would already be out-of-date and hence no longer worth reading. In the author's view, the time for a revised edition has not yet come. The world situation has not changed fundamentally since the mid-1990s. If my general historical analysis and observations on the world at the end of the century require major revision, it is not because they have been invalidated by subsequent events. The international situation remains as sketched in the first part of chapter 19. The dramatic and terrible events in the region of the Great Lakes of central Africa (former Zaire) provide an additional illustration of this. That the "short 20th century" ended in a general crisis of all systems, and not simply with the collapse of communism, is central to the argument of this book. If anything, it is confirmed by the eruption in 1997-98 of the most serious global crisis of the capitalist economy since the 1930s. Indeed, it suggests that the author was too optimistic in suggesting that the world economy was "due to enter another era of prosperous expansion before the end of the millennium", although he also noted - as it turned out correctly -- "that this might be hampered for a while by the after-effects of the disintegration of Soviet socialism, by the collapse of parts of the world into anarchy and warfare, and perhaps by an excessive dedication to global free trade". In short, in the author's view, the merits and weaknesses of his interpretation of the 20th century have not - so far - been significantly affected by what has happened in the world since 1994. For this reason the text before French readers, apart from minimal corrections, is the text as published, or about to be published, in other languages. I leave it to their judgement However I would like to put on record my thanks to Editions Complex, who have made this edition possible, to P.E. Dauzat and the other translators who have produced a superb translation of a long and difficult English text, and to those friends in Paris who, over the past few years demonstrated that not all French intellectuals are opposed to allowing their countrymen to read works by authors of whom the bien-pensant fashions of the 1990s disapprove. * Historian. Author inter alia of Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914-1991, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875, and The Age of Empire, 1875-1914, all published by Abacus (Little, Brown) (1) "Chunnel Vision", Lingua Franca, November 1997 pp 22-24. "Furet vs. Hobsbawm", Newsletter, Fall/Winter 1997-98, p 10. Pierre Nora, "Traduire: necessité et difficultés", Le Débat, Paris, no. 93, January-February 1997, pp 93-95. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2002 9:07 AM Subject: Eric Hobsbawm - Re: United Nations Assault on Human Rights No one care to comment on the uhj's guiding marxist light? The uhj's "Century of Light" is clearly aimed at the radical elements of the NGO community and intended to play to their assumptions. --- Incidentally, those interested in Eric Hobsbawn, a guiding light of the bahai fundamentalist uhj, might want to read the reviews below. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship https://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9511/reviews/bacevich.html Voice of the Old Left The Age of Extremes: A History of the World, 1914-1991. By Eric Hobsbawm. Pantheon Books. 627 pp. $30. Reviewed by A. J. Bacevich Eric Hobsbawm ranks among the most prolific and most influential British historians of the entire postwar era. He is also a person who, throughout his long career, has without apology identified himself as a man of the left. So he remains today. For Hobsbawm, history is the continuation of politics by other means. In exploring the past, the historian's true purpose is to shape the future. Thus, whether acknowledged or not, real history, serious history, is always deeply political. Neither predisposed to avoid controversy nor willing to confine himself to arid subjects of antiquarian interest, Hobsbawm makes no pretense of dispassionate objectivity. His is political history in the grand manner: he appropriates the largest canvas within reach and attacks it with bold, slashing interpretative strokes. And Hobsbawm appears to relish controversy. His overall aim is less to inform the ignorant or to enlighten the befuddled than to rally the like-minded and to antagonize the opposition. Among Hobsbawm's best-known works is a trilogy on the "long nineteenth century," his term for the period from 1789 to 1914 during which European influence reached seemingly unassailable heights. The Age of Extremes forms a sequel to that trilogy, charting the course of what Hobsbawm has labeled the "short twentieth century" extending from the outbreak of World War I (and the ensuing demise of Europe) through the end of the Cold War-a history, not incidentally, of Hobsbawm's own time. This is a deeply personal account. Although the narrator seldom intrudes directly into the story, Hobsbawm's version of the "short century" revolves to a large extent around the great controversies that animated the era's myriad progressives, social revolutionaries, and proponents of secular utopia-in short, the sundry groups that comprise the modern left with which Hobsbawm has aligned himself and that (with few exceptions) derived singular inspiration from the upheaval that in 1917 overturned the old order in Russia and gave birth to that beacon of social justice and humanitarian virtue, the Soviet Union. The Age of Extremes can best be understood as a testimonial to that left, Hobsbawm's effort to explain how such a worthy enterprise has now ended in abject and humiliating failure, its ideals discredited, its vast pretensions demolished. Above all, in recounting the "short twentieth century's" descent into barbarism, Hobsbawm seeks to absolve the left of any responsibility for the era's various horrors and to refute any suggestion that the Grand Cause itself might have been from the very outset misguided, if not inherently malignant. It's a tough case to make, one requiring both bravado and guile. Hobsbawm offers plenty of both. He regales his reader with tales of his heroes: "the noble Ho Chi Minh," "the pacifically-minded Khrushchev," and, of course, "Fidel"-"strong and charismatic [and] determined to demonstrate personal bravery and to be a hero of whatever cause of freedom against tyranny." Hobsbawm acknowledges, but cannot quite bring himself to condemn, the crimes of Joseph Stalin. To do so would undermine his overall depiction of the Soviet Union as brave and admirable, unappreciated and willfully misunderstood. Thus, he advises, "the victory over Hitler's Germany was essentially won, and could only have been won, by the Red Army." (Emphasis added.) Having thus delivered the world from the scourge of fascism, communism next proceeded to save capitalism from itself "by providing it with the incentive, fear, to reform itself after the Second World War." Such fear on the part of the West was, of course, quite misplaced, since the Soviet Union at war's end yearned for nothing so much as to sustain "the framework of the all-embracing anti-fascist alliance, i.e., it looked forward to a long-term coexistence, or rather symbiosis, of capitalist and Communist systems." Responsibility for the ensuing Cold War thus rests squarely upon the West (above all, upon the United States), which whipped itself into a frenzy over "the supposed Soviet threat." That such a threat never existed, according to Hobsbawm, is patently obvious. Stalin entertained no imperial aspirations. There was no Soviet monolith, merely "a consortium of Communist states, organized around the Soviet Union." (Did the residents of, say, Budapest in 1956 or Prague in 1968 somehow misconstrue the privileges accruing to them as members of this consortium? On this point, Hobsbawm is silent.) Wherever its political influence extended beyond its own borders, the USSR was "specifically committed to [building] mixed economies under multiparty parliamentary democracies." Moreover, the economic and technological superiority of the West was from the outset so evident that for the capitalist bloc to feel challenged by communism was clearly absurd. The Cold War, "from the start, was a war of unequals." Thus, if we are to believe Hobsbawm, the Soviet Union was simultaneously so mighty that it alone possessed the strength to crush Nazi Germany and so benign and so weak that mindless hysteria along could explain why anyone would suspect Stalin's peaceful intentions. And so it goes: that "passionate reformer" Mikhail Gorbachev is commended for singlehandedly extricating the world from the jaws of the Cold War; Israel is stigmatized and then quickly dismissed as simply a "new anti-Arab state"; the Catholic Church is repeatedly denounced for siding with the forces of political reaction against the forces of enlightenment. Indeed, Hobsbawm's antipathy for virtually all religion forms a recurrent underlying theme. Were The Age of Extremes merely an apology for the left, it would be of limited interest. To the author's credit, his book is much more than that. According to Hobsbawm, future generations contemplating the furious ideological rows that fixed the attention of elites in the decades after 1917 may well wonder what all the fuss was about-not that the arguments over fascism or communism were pointless, but that in the long run they will turn out to be of less consequence than the massive technological, social, and cultural changes that have so transformed global society during the short twentieth century. The result, Hobsbawm argues, is that the world in which democratic capitalism has triumphed is, in fact, a world on the brink of profound crisis. That Hobsbawm all too predictably attributes that crisis entirely to the crimes and excesses of capitalism is a point that need not detain us. That the maladies to which he points do indeed constitute a crisis of historic proportions is an argument that merits thoughtful consideration. Many items in his bill of particulars-recurring episodes of unspeakable violence and savagery decades after civilized peoples proclaimed "never again," growing desperation throughout much of the so- called Third World, the malaise of affluent societies suffering from the increasing "privatization of life" and the growth of "consumer egoism," the inadequacy and corruption of politics even in mature democracies, the diminished capacity of established institutions to respond to the challenges that they face-transcend ideology. Hobsbawm is on to something: with regard to the problems confronting mankind today, there is something different, larger, and particularly frightening. To turn to Hobsbawm and his colleagues on the Old Left for a remedy to those problems, however, would be hazardous if not downright reckless. They have had their moment and the world is still tallying up the cost of the havoc they wreaked. Yet the collapse of the left's visions for a secular utopia-however welcome-does not detract from the validity of its critique. Rather, the very depth of that failure might remind us that the ultimate solution to our present crisis-if solution there be-is likely to be found not in the realm of politics but in the realm of the spirit. A.J. Bacevich is Executive Director of the Foreign Policy Institute at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. May 22, 2001 The New World Trade Order - The Decisive Importance Of The Non-traded sector https://www.indiainfoline.com/nevi/thne.html Eric Hobsbawn has written a book recently on the "New Century" where he clearly establishes what kind of changes the new century will witness. Man has been sailing seas and crossing mountains ever since he has emerged upon this world as an intelligent species. We have had ancient voyages and mediaeval trade routes and at the turn of the modern era with Vasco da Gama and Columbus, momentous journeys in geographical discovery. We have had, all over the world, at least two centuries of colonialism, where the resources of the colonised nation continuously fed the industries and commerce of the master nation. All of these events since time immemorial have taken place on a global scale. Then, where is the singularity or uniqueness of the globalisation which we are experiencing now? Eric Hobsbawn says that the present globalisation is unique because this time, it is neither trade nor conquest, but a reorganisation of production upon the rational calculations of global optima which purports to bring about an integration of the world as never before. Therefore, it is likely that the resources will flow across the globe to settle into countries where they can perform in the most competitive manner. In the days of Schumpeter, i.e. in the sixties, technological sophistication was directly related to competitiveness of manufactures. But in the present world of standardised technology as well as of freely available knowledge and very mobile skilled persons, the advantages due to technical competence no longer belongs specifically to nations. What belong specifically to nations are other things which cannot be separated or even be traded by nations. These, in terms of economics will be called as non-tradeables and include water and power supply, other civic amenities, political stability, compliance with the more standardised rules of the WTO and a general work ambience of the country. Such items and these items cannot be traded, nor can they be accounted for but they constitute very crucial conditions for competitiveness in the traded goods (manufacturing, agriculture and services) to take effect. In the days of globalisation, it is really not important to know how much a nation trade and what it trades in, but how much of resources from all over the world it has been able to attract towards itself. This is because, the bulk of a nation's wealth would come from its production, and trade is important because it makes the nation concentrate upon what it produces the best. Presently, nations are likely to vie with each other in order to attract more and more resources towards themselves so that international capital, knowledge and skills flow within their boundaries generating income and wealth. In the post-capitalist phase, or the advanced capitalist phase, which started roughly around the mid-50's, was that it was no longer important as to who owned the capital as much as the fact who controlled it. Daniel Bell, a leading American sociologist said that production needs to be controlled by the educated, intelligent, informed and innovative persons and not by the ones who merely have the wealth to invest. Thus started a long phase of the importance of "control of capital", where managers became more important than the industrialists who owned business. Such a separation between control and ownership of capital came into existence due to the intensification of knowledge and skills into production. In the days of globalisation, it is important to realise that knowledge and skills may become relatively easy to access and acquire. Most of our innovations are well-documented and technology and skills themselves have become traded commodities. What remains as the "cutting edge" or the differentiating factor is the non-traded sector - infrastructure. If infrastructure is supposed to create all the difference to the competitiveness of industries, then neither ownership, nor control, but the location of production sites will become important. Managers can be posted anywhere and skilled labour can migrate, but the stationary factor, infrastructure will become the most deciding factor for a country's wealth in the years to come. This means that every country will want to improve its chances of attracting investments and in order to do this they will try their level best to have the best of sanitations, best of environmental purity, the best of power supply and so on. Health and education, two most important factors in the employability of labour would also become engaging political considerations. What impact will this have on the nations' production structures? It may be easily deduced that with such an importance on the infrastructure, the best of the nation's resources will shift towards the production of such non-tradeables, like road construction, schools, education, information technology, environmental control and so on. But the problem with these non-tradeables is that they are most of the times commercially unviable - the full user cost will be very difficult to recover from a country like India and many such developing economies. Then how will the government or the investor ever hope to get back the funds. The only way one can realise the investments into infrastructure projects is through the very long winded indirect effect where the investor hopes that with improved infrastructure, more investments will come into the country which will raise the income of the people and with which they will either buy the firm's utilities, in case the firm is in the private sector, or they will pay tax, if the investor is the government. This is why, in the economic policies of nations as well as the investments into infrastructure go hand in hand with the openness towards foreign capital. Investments into infrastructure cannot be profitable without a large inflow of investments. If this large inflow of investments take place out of indigenous resources, then it is fine. But if the domestic entrepreneurs do not come forth with their investments then, one must keep one's doors open to the foreign investments. In other words, foreign investments are intricately linked to the investments into infrastructure. Therefore, the future of globalisation is likely to see an increase in the production of non-traded goods all over the world. This will be because the non-traded sector will serve as the condition of success for the traded sector. The non-traded sector requires a very large amount of surplus because its costs are not always directly recoverable. In the macro-scenario, such costs can only be recovered from increased sale of the traded goods. In other words, the traded sector must heavily cross-subsidise the non-traded sector. This will make more and more demands on the traded sector to become profitable and competitive, capture larger and larger market share and add more value to the customer. It is true that we may assign the increase in global competition to the harder pressures on the commodity sector in particular and the traded sector in general, but when seen wholistically, the need for competitiveness of the traded sector lies precisely in the fact that it must now subsidise the non-traded sector. According to Andre Gunder Frank and Samir Amin, leading economists of the 60's and the 80's respectively, the world production was likely to get divided and specialised. One set of nations would continue to produce less value-added products, while the other countries would continue to produce the higher value-added products. The first set would be the developing countries, while the latter would be the developed countries. The theories said that even when both grew in terms of value-addition, the developing countries would still be producing goods which were relatively less in value-addition in comparison to the developed countries. In the present context, the relationship between the countries may reverse and the extent of reversal will depend on how far the traded sector in every country subsidises the non-traded sector. One of the most certain ways for generating a surplus in the traded sector is to relocate industries - closer to outsourced units, closer to sources of power and water, closer to centres of consumption. All of such efforts are likely to reduce costs, increase value for the customers and in effect, corner a larger market share for itself. This is why, the world is increasingly likely to see intra-regional trade than interregional trade, trade which takes place due to the relocation of plants seeking facilities rather than specific resources. The global players of steel are increasing getting interested in channelising their sales into a particular country through service centres and other auxiliary facilities such that the final costs of the commodity when it reaches the final customer may be contained. Trade will now take place more in terms of relocation as well as get concentrated within regions. This will not happen due to a rising economic regionalism, as it is many a times made out to be, but will happen more out of a definite economic need to maximise its subsidisation to the non-traded sector. Susmita Dasgupta https://www.en.monde-diplomatique.fr/1999/12/05hobsbawm Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991 was published in Great Britain in 1994 and in the United States shortly after. It was soon published in all the main international languages - except one. It has appeared in German, Spanish and Portuguese (in both European and American editions), Italian, Chinese (in both Taiwanese and Mainland characters), Japanese, and Arabic. A Russian edition was soon underway. Editions were also in progress in all the state languages of the European Union - except one - and in the languages of most ex-communist states of central and eastern Europe (Polish, Czech, Hungarian, Rumanian, Slovene, Serbocroat, Albanian). But not, until October, in French. Unlike publishers in Lithuania (with 3.7 million inhabitants), Moldavia (4.3 million) and Iceland (270,000), publishers in France (with its population of 58.4 million) did not apparently consider it feasible, or desirable, to translate Age of Extremes into their national language. Yet the book was considered of sufficient importance for the review Le Debat (January-February 1997) to devote almost 100 pages to a critical symposium on it - including several pages by eminent French publishers explaining why the book could not be published in France. But for the initiative of Le Monde Diplomatique and a Belgian publisher, it would still not be accessible to the French-speaking world. The resistance of French publishers, alone among those of some 30 countries, to translating Age of Extremes is curious. The author is not the only one to find it surprising. Most of my earlier books were translated into French and some, indeed, have recently been republished in France. I had certainly not expected the publishers of the three volumes of my history of the 19th century - still in print - to refuse, without comment or explanation, to publish Age of Extremes, which completes the series. Was it probable that this book (unlike my earlier French titles) would have lost money, as French publishers have suggested? To judge by its reception and sales in all the countries in which it has been published, lack of public interest is unlikely. The collective failure of French publishers to publish the present book calls for some explanation. Anti-Marxist bias The most concise explanation comes from an American academic journal that specialises in surveying intellectual debates and scandals, Lingua Franca: "Twenty-five years ago", observes Tony Judt, a historian at New York University, "Age of Extremes would have been translated in a week. So what has changed? Three forces have apparently conspired to keep the book out of translation: the growth of a vituperative anti-Marxism among French intellectuals; a budget squeeze in humanities publishing; and, not least, a publishing community either unwilling or afraid to defy these trends" (1). That the present book appeared shortly before the late François Furet's highly successful Le Passé d'une Illusion, an "equally ambitious treatment of 20th century history and one considerably closer to current Paris taste in its treatment of Soviet communism", may, says Judt, have "made French publishers wary of coming out with a work like Hobsbawm's". A similar explanation was offered by the new Newsletter of the Committee on Intellectual Correspondence sponsored by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Wissenschaftskolleg in Berlin and the Suntory Foundation in Japan (2). Current Parisian intellectual fashion, it argues, would find Hobsbawm's unrepentant position on the left "something of an embarrassment". This is also the view of Pierre Nora of Gallimard in an authoritative and lucid account of the situation as seen by a French publisher. All the publishers, he says, "whether they want to or not, are obliged to take into account the intellectual and ideological circumstances in which they publish. There are serious reasons to think . that [Hobsbawm's] book would appear in an unfavourable intellectual and historical climate. Which explains the unwillingness to take chances." France was "the longest and most deeply Stalinised country". Thus "decompression", when it came, "accentuated hostility to anything that could from near or far recall that former pro-Soviet, pro-communist age, including plain Marxism. Eric Hobsbawn cultivates this attachment to the revolutionary cause, even if at a distance, as a point of pride . But in France at this moment, it goes down badly" (3). It is not clear whether, or to what extent, the publisher himself feels part of that France where the author's attitude "goes down badly". In the light of such arguments readers might expect Age of Extremes to be - like Furet's Le Passé d'une illusion - essentially an extended political or ideological polemic. It was not written as such. It is not the same kind of book at all, as readers will immediately discover. It asks to be judged on its merits as a comprehensive history of the 20th century (and the final volume of a series, begun many years ago, which together constitutes a history of the world since the late 18th century Age of Revolution). It has been recognised and taken seriously as such in countries whose regimes and intellectual fashions differ as widely as China and Taiwan, Israel and Syria, Canada, South Korea and Brazil, not to mention the US. Much to the financial satisfaction of author and publishers, it has also been very widely sold - and read - in three continents. One may observe in passing that publishers in countries at least as profoundly "Stalinised" in their time as France, and exposed to an even more dramatic "decompression" - namely the ex-communist states - have not hesitated to publish the book. (In communist times my historical works were never published in Russia, Poland or Czechoslovakia). The publication of a French translation of Age of Extremes now make it possible to discover whether reviewers and the intelligent reading public in France are really as different from those of other countries as Pierre Nora's unflattering assessment of the intellectual state of France suggests. It will also allow readers to judge another argument which has been privately used to justify the continued refusal to publish Age of Extremes in France - namely that by the time a translation was made, the book would already be out-of-date and hence no longer worth reading. In the author's view, the time for a revised edition has not yet come. The world situation has not changed fundamentally since the mid-1990s. If my general historical analysis and observations on the world at the end of the century require major revision, it is not because they have been invalidated by subsequent events. The international situation remains as sketched in the first part of chapter 19. The dramatic and terrible events in the region of the Great Lakes of central Africa (former Zaire) provide an additional illustration of this. That the "short 20th century" ended in a general crisis of all systems, and not simply with the collapse of communism, is central to the argument of this book. If anything, it is confirmed by the eruption in 1997-98 of the most serious global crisis of the capitalist economy since the 1930s. Indeed, it suggests that the author was too optimistic in suggesting that the world economy was "due to enter another era of prosperous expansion before the end of the millennium", although he also noted - as it turned out correctly -- "that this might be hampered for a while by the after-effects of the disintegration of Soviet socialism, by the collapse of parts of the world into anarchy and warfare, and perhaps by an excessive dedication to global free trade". In short, in the author's view, the merits and weaknesses of his interpretation of the 20th century have not - so far - been significantly affected by what has happened in the world since 1994. For this reason the text before French readers, apart from minimal corrections, is the text as published, or about to be published, in other languages. I leave it to their judgement However I would like to put on record my thanks to Editions Complex, who have made this edition possible, to P.E. Dauzat and the other translators who have produced a superb translation of a long and difficult English text, and to those friends in Paris who, over the past few years demonstrated that not all French intellectuals are opposed to allowing their countrymen to read works by authors of whom the bien-pensant fashions of the 1990s disapprove. * Historian. Author inter alia of Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914-1991, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875, and The Age of Empire, 1875-1914, all published by Abacus (Little, Brown) (1) "Chunnel Vision", Lingua Franca, November 1997 pp 22-24. "Furet vs. Hobsbawm", Newsletter, Fall/Winter 1997-98, p 10. Pierre Nora, "Traduire: necessité et difficultés", Le Débat, Paris, no. 93, January-February 1997, pp 93-95. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 7:10 AM Subject: FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship62002.Zip 17 megabytes bahai - FREE - Download My Entire Website: BahaiCensorship62002.Zip 17 megabytes zipped - 6/2002 Includes All Archives https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm STILL AVAILABLE: BahaiCensorship2001CD version! 23 megabytes zipped 1/1/2002 https://balder.prohosting.com/~bahai/archive.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:48 PM Subject: Professor Juan Cole - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies "I am reporting a major shift in the Baha'i faith similar to the take-over of the Southern Baptist convention by fundamentalists in the 1980s and 1990s (Ammerman 1990)." Professor Juan Cole, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 6:17 AM Subject: Re: CEDAW--- pro gay, pro-abort, anti-family bahai faith & its Influence on the United Nations 5/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UNmenu.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship To understand the influence of the bahai faith on the United Nations, I suggest the reader might find it helpful to consider these documents in the following order: Doug Martin, member of the bahai universal house of justice on the United Nations: "In the highest circles of the UN, people are consulting on Baha'u'llah's issues! Baha'is coordinated the work of all the NGO's at the Millennial Summit. The permanent representative of the Baha'i International Community was the Chair. Then the BIC was called to represent all of Civil Society at the governmental Millennium Summit -- the only NGO to do so." {If interested in reading full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "UN" match case, several clicks into it)} Cf. Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm See then my messages on the bahai faith & the UN: uhj LIES to United Nations & US Government June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN.htm Bahais at United Nations Millennium Forum & Summit June 2000 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/UN2.htm Bahai international community Abuses its Access to UN MF Mailing List 4/2002 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/OneCountry.htm Note especially at the end that the bic abused its control over MFDiscuss@yahoo.com in order to suppress my informing other Forum members of its abuse. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- After reading ALL of the above, think carefully about the influence on the UN of someone like Doug Martin who holds such a fundamentalist interpretation of the bahai faith. Does the UN know the record of the bahai faith regarding freedom of conscience within its own ranks? I would find it very worrisome if it does. My guess is that bahais at the UN, such as Techeste Ahderom, co-chair of the Millennium Forum and the principal bahai representative to the United Nations, dismiss concerns whenever they are raised by anyone within the Organization, essentially participating in deception. Brief History of Douglas Martin Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm "Tom Smith QIM" wrote in message news:993e29a8.0206302019.2f5d23a0@posting.google.com... > "Paul Hammond" wrote in message news:<3d1f3d11@212.67.96.135>... > > Robert Arvay wrote in message > > news:457ff776.0206281701.34d50727@posting.google.com... > > > Greetings; > > > > > > I have not characterized CEDAW at all. I have merely excerpted from > > > the recent writings of highly respected and well known commentators > > > who have read the documents and followed the story. There are many > > > such, and I've quoted but a few. You can peruse for yourself on such > > > sites as Jewish World Review and Worldnetdaily.Com > > > > > > > Ok - the wild characterisations of these commentators > > who you admire so much. Same difference. > > > > Actually, you did call CEDAW "preposterous" - and it was this > > I was reacting to. > > Ahem, please excuse me while I break in here for a second. > > Yes, he did, and if Baha u llah were alive, he would not only say > CEDAW was "preposterous", he'd be rolling over in his grave at how his > son, Abdu'l-Baha, was being sloppy on this issue of "The Advancement > of Women" in the context of traditional religious teachings, of which > Baha u llah was certainly respectful of. Baha u llah referred to > women as "handmaidens" and all his pronouncement of them in relation > to God in this respect were based on that social status. His son took > a major leap and ignored that. > > > > Nor have I called Baha'is hypocrites. The AO is definitely > > > hypocritical, selectively acting politically for the radical left, > > > > Erm - *when* did they selectively act politically > > for the radical left? > > Erm...The Beijing conference of which the NGO Bahai's were the largest > contingent? > > > I'd be shocked, considering they're a bunch of fundies! > > They would be fundies if Baha u llah were alive, but his son > apparently changed all that. > > > but > > > when confronted with such abuses as abortion, hiding behind their "no > > > politics" policy. > > > > > > > > > > Baha'i is not loosely correlated to the UN. If I'm not mistaken, it > > > is by far the largest NGO at the UN. And as a religion hoping to > > > become THE world government, one is reasonable to suspect they are > > > using their UN affiliation to advance toward that goal. > > > > > > > I have no idea of the relative sizes of NGOs, and I'd be surprised > > if they were "by far the largest" - what does that mean, anyway, > > surely all affiliated NGOs get fair representation. > > I did a search of Bahai's websites and UN associations. The Bahai's > are up to their neck, and much more so than other religious groups, > with both the UN and "Advancement of Women". See, there's good reason > the Bahai's are popular with the girls. > > > Whether the Baha'i Faith sees a theocratic future or not is > > a matter of some controversy amongst Baha'is, and any > > connection between the "Most Great Peace" and > > present UN Baha'i activity is tenuous at best. > > Baha u llah's son (Abdu'l-baha) made sure to tie the "advancement of > women" directly to Bahai eschatology. Read it for yourself, it's on > the official Bahai page ("Advancement of Women" articles). While much > of this is true and good, Abdu'l-baha got alittle ahead of himself and > didn't make clear enough distinctions of what he meant. I'm sure if > he were alive today that even he would say CEDAW was way beyond > anything he had in mind. The best that can be said is that they both > believed, rightly so, in a cultural or from the heart kind of > equality, not the feminist kind where government shoves it down your > throat. In actuality, America was moving rapidly in this direction > well before the jack booted feminists came along. > > > I guess it's just that the UN at present is the closest > > thing to a world government, and Baha'is feel duty > > bound to give such assistance as they can to > > the better functioning of such an effort. > > The Vatican has a seat at the UN and is fighting CEDAW tooth and nail > while Bahai's website is second only to the official CEDAW website as > the most referred to CEDAW website. The Bahai's have been sucked into > what will someday be seen as a kind of attempted world takeover by the > anti-Christ, the evil feminists. I don't think the rank and file are > aware of this, and if they were and were to persist, God save their > souls. > > > > And I STILL have no answer to my question asked in the thread by that > > > name: does the Baha'i Faith publicly declare that it upholds the > > > values of marriage (heterosexual), and the family as the primary > > > decisionmaker for children. > > > > > > > I'm sure it does. But, I'm not sure that it takes any sides > > in the debate on CEDAW. > > Refer to my comments above. It appears the Bahai's ARE the largest > NGO behind the rad fems in the UN. I think your congregations should > at least be informed of this. > > > > My suspicion is that Baha'i is one thing on its face, quite another > > > under its veil. And the more dissembling I get in response, the > > > stronger that suspicion becomes. > > > > > > Well, that's because you're just here to air your prejudices, isn't > > it? > > He has a point, I see the same thing. Any sincere Bahai's here better > start demanding that at least a critical and honest look at what the > leaders of your faith are doing with the UN and feminism. It is not > only in order, but the survival of your religion may depend on it. > > Tom Smith > The American Union of Men > https://groups.yahoo.com/group/aum/?yguid=10837983 ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 5:45 AM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth I agree here with Ron's comments. My earlier exchange with Nima regarding his saying corporations were all "scorching the earth" were along these lines. I do believe Ron rightly identifies what's unique in Baha'u'llah's perspective, an emphasis on unity that embraces values beyond the cliches of the leftist liberalism of modernity, while respecting the moral responsibility and complexity of the individual. In so far as the uhj has aligned itself with such cliches versus the teachings of Baha'u'llah, e.g., Eric Hobsbawm in the Century of Light, race, gender, etc., I continue to maintain that only the freedom of conscience Abdu'l-Baha spoke of highly can provide an invigoratingly open arena capable of protecting the Baha'i Faith from repeating the appalling mistakes and crimes of the more totalitarian forms of leftist liberalism. As many of us know, open discussion is not permitted and tolerated today within the bahai faith. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Ron House" wrote in message news:3D2515B6.7ACB2758@usq.edu.au... > Freethought110 wrote: > > > > a) virtually every clause grants to women AT LEAST equal rights to men, > > > but not the other way round, and > > > > Ron, those rights to men are already given. > > Hi Nima, > > It looks as if a vigorous debate has broken out about CEDAW, so I won't > argue in detail here. However, I think that you (and all leftists here) > have a serious problem. Your aims and objectives are, IMHO, 110% good > and altruistic. But you have a very hard road ahead, because actually > doing anything useful in the world that will contribute to your real > aims' being realised must first require that you recognise that the > majority of the liberal ideas you have acquired (from uni studies and > independent research from liberal sources) are actually > counterproductive (or worse) to your real goals. > > I take it for granted you (all) want a world in which each child is > loved for its unique individual self, and is not categorised and given > biased treatment on the basis of its genetic codes. > > But putting people in two baskets (black/white, male/female, or > whatever) and comparing the baskets is absolutely certain to fail to > deliver impartiality to the individual as individual. Therefore ALL > ideological category-based social policies and laws MUST fail to give > you what you really want. > > But the sources that inform your world view do more than just make the > category mistake: they inculcate a mythology, a world view, according to > which all events and circumstances are judged. Consider your comment > above. Like all commentary from the liberal side in this and similar > debates, it fails to address details. A conservative like Robert Arvay > can write paragraph-by-paragraph commentary on the treaty (not that I > agree with all that he says), but the response from the liberal side is > always in generalities ("not impressed", "ludicrous", "can't agree", > etc., being among such comments I have seen here). There are two reasons > for this: (1) the liberals are wrong and looking too close would make > this hard to deny, and (2) the mythology instills an incapacity to see > this fact. > > In the specific case of your comment above, I have just related a case > (it was the bowling club case, if you recall) where men failed to gain a > judgement that they would have gained had they been women, so to say > that men "already have those rights" is fallacious; if they had the > rights, they would have won the case. This is so trivial and obvious > that a substantial reason is required as to why someone of your > exceptional intellectual skills could fail to see it. That reason is > your thrall to the leftist mythology of group-based oppression and > discrimination. It matters little whether the specific focus of that > mythology is class (as in Marxism), race, or sex; the mythos that sees > the world in terms of toxic malfunction caused by group-based oppression > is damaging, highly damaging, both in its practical consequences and in > its sabotage of critical thinking in all those who are infected by it. I > have pointed out before here, in the course of various fruitless > attempts to get leftists to see the truth behind even a single concrete > case, that this mythology is the direct opposite of Baha'u'llah's > principle that "All are the fruits of one tree and the leaves of one > branch." > > If all are the leaves of one branch, if "in this day, women are > accounted as men", then there is no excuse even to consider framing a > treaty in terms of comparison between two baskets of humans identified > by their genetic code: simply pass equitable laws and let the chips fall > where they may. > > I don't quite know how to conclude these thoughts. I do recognise that > the above is offensive, so for that I beg your forgiveness. It is also a > heartfelt plea to you, Nima, whom I greatly admire and respect, and to > other leftists, to start entertaining (seriously, not merely as a > thoughtless toss-off acknowledgement) the possibility that you do not > have an infallible analysis of the world in your possession. That is the > challenge you make to others in other circumstances, so it is fair that > you take it up for yourselves also. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > https://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house > "Every time you manage to close the door on Reality, > it comes in through the window." - (Unknown). ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 5:54 AM Subject: Re: Daughter of Ross Campbell An interesting connection, seeing cbs in terms of the untouchables.... Makes me think too of in Japan the burakumin were an untouchable class that suffered many injustices for centuries. In fact they're still prejudiced against by some. Dermod's Boycott remarks bring up ancient ostracism in all its forms.... Very old evils "turning the basic principles of the faith on their head." Randy, well said! -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:5d9V8.1232$Xt1.954@nwrddc03.gnilink.net... > Dermod > > One could ask what is the difference between the "untouchable" class in > India and the descendents of CB's in bahai? Apparently there is none. > Arguably the method given by Abdu'l-Baha to preserve the unity of the faith > should never be carried to these extremes, but the group currently running > things apparently isn't intelligent enough to figure this out. > > The whole idea of creating a new class of untouchable humans is another > example of turning the basic principles of the faith on their head. > > Thanks for the fascinating information on Captain Boycott. Sure you're not > just making it up? > > Cheers, Randy > > -- > > Dermod Ryder wrote in message > news:ag2o4b$ihbsk$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > > > This whole hang-up about Covenant Breakers and their families is to my > > mind one of the principal obnoxious cultic behaviours of the scumbags > > at the centre of this so-called faith. The objective of it is very > > clear - to humiliate those who dare oppose. > > > > > > > > Either that, Martin, or it's a matter of guilt by association. > > > > Children of so-called Covenant-breakers are to be shunned, just > > like > > > > their parents, and it doesn't matter whether the individual has > > ever > > > > made his or her declaration to the Faith within the organization > > under > > > > the sans-Guardian UHJ. It might also be noted that the age of the > > > > offspring apparently doesn't make any difference either --whether > > it's > > > > a child who is five years old or fifty years old... > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I think this is basically it. The only way a child of a > > > covenant-breaker will not be shunned is if he or she becomes a > > Baha'i, and > > > agrees to shun parents and any relatives that continue to associate > > with > > > them. I think technically, non-Baha'i children of covenant-breakers > > are not > > > considered CBs themselves, but are classed as "supporters of > > > covenant-breakers". And it will go on down the generations, too -- > > children, > > > grand-children, great-grandchildren, all will be shunned. I know > > John > > > Carre's daughter, Carol, described her experience quite poignantly. > > These > > > descendants are even spied on; it's really quite insane. What do > > they do? > > > Keep birth and death records on all CB families, so they don't miss > > any > > > descendants? I know with Carol, they knew where she was living and > > working. > > > > > > Karen > > > https://www.bacquet.tk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 7:14 AM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth Noam Chomsky et al: So discredited I can't waste my time and effort on him/them. I respect your right to choose whom you admire. Obviously, *I know* bahais are not liberal in any sense of the word. My point was that fundamentalists *pretend* to be liberal, champion various liberal causes, etc., in order to appeal to the uninformed and thereby gain converts. I largely agree with everything Ron had to say about CEDAW. Baha'u'llah's vision is beyond the left and right of modernity.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$5ixryg$xn02$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > First of all, if I am to be lumped in with the Left, I'd like to be lumped > in with the right people. If you're gonna put me alongside anyone, then Noam > Chomsky and Jurgen Habermas are the Left I belong to. I am a > Chomskian-Habermasian liberal communitarian, or liberal social democrat in > the European context. > > And neither of you guys have proven your cases. > > Ron, I have yet to see you articulate precisely what *specific* > legal/jurisprudential problems (and *substantive* philosophical issues) > exist with CEDAW. All you and Robert Arvay have done is taken various > isolated and out of context clauses out of this document and offered vague > and alarmist neo-Conservative interpretations and platitudes using highly > subjective, skewed and dubious jurisprudential categories and reasoning to > say again and again that this document is "evil." I offered the point that > those who see this document as an attempt by radical-feminists to impose a > sort of ideological agenda and initiate a radical-feminist global > kulturkampf, make a series of fallacious assumptions: 1) That this document > is merely applicable to the West and 2) that this documents seeks to strip > men of rights (whatever that means!). I ask again to be shown where in the > text of CEDAW within the context of the document as a whole this *actually* > occurs. Also you forget that Afghanistan under the Taliban was only *one* > example in a long list of many of the sort of ultra-Rightwing reactionary > religious totalitarianisms possible in the world today and the kind of > hyper-apartheid regime it can impose upon women. I invite both you and > Robert Arvay to thoroughly avail yourselves of the archives of cases of the > two prominent human rights organizations - Amnesty International and Human > Rights Watch - and come back and tell me with a straight face that CEDAW is > not necessary vis-a-vis countries like Sa'udi Arabia, the Sudan, Pakistan, > Oman, Iran, Yemen, Morroco, Sub-Saharan and West African countries with > sizeable Muslim populations, etc. > > McDonalds corporation as well as Pepsi Cola, to name just two, have a track > record a mile long of being tied to industries in South America who have > directly been involved in Amazon deforestation. So far they have avoided > environmental liability action by any group or government because 1) they > can out spend and have out spent any initiative by private groups towards > successful litigation and 2) governments in the global south do not see such > high priority environmental catastrophes as any kind of priority at all. But > the abuses continue and the alliances of American and Western European > corporations with these industries continue. Pat also mentioned the Exxon > Valdez disaster as an example of "scorced earths," and the list goes on. > > Fred, Baha'is are as far to the Left as I am the true Emperor of China! They > are rightwingers through and through. Fundamentalism is a phenomenon of the > Right after all. We on the Left do not suffer from such mass hysterical > neuroses. > > > -- > Freethought110 > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:ag3tac$isvqr$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > I agree here with Ron's comments. My earlier exchange > > with Nima regarding his saying corporations were all > > "scorching the earth" were along these lines. I do believe > > Ron rightly identifies what's unique in Baha'u'llah's > > perspective, an emphasis on unity that embraces values > > beyond the cliches of the leftist liberalism of modernity, > > while respecting the moral responsibility and complexity > > of the individual. > > > > In so far as the uhj has aligned itself with such cliches > > versus the teachings of Baha'u'llah, e.g., Eric Hobsbawm > > in the Century of Light, race, gender, etc., I continue to > > maintain that only the freedom of conscience Abdu'l-Baha > > spoke of highly can provide an invigoratingly open arena > > capable of protecting the Baha'i Faith from repeating the > > appalling mistakes and crimes of the more totalitarian > > forms of leftist liberalism. As many of us know, open > > discussion is not permitted and tolerated today within the > > bahai faith. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > > > > > > > > > > "Ron House" wrote in message > > news:3D2515B6.7ACB2758@usq.edu.au... > > > Freethought110 wrote: > > > > > > > > a) virtually every clause grants to women AT LEAST equal rights to > > men, > > > > > but not the other way round, and > > > > > > > > Ron, those rights to men are already given. > > > > > > Hi Nima, > > > > > > It looks as if a vigorous debate has broken out about CEDAW, so I won't > > > argue in detail here. However, I think that you (and all leftists here) > > > have a serious problem. Your aims and objectives are, IMHO, 110% good > > > and altruistic. But you have a very hard road ahead, because actually > > > doing anything useful in the world that will contribute to your real > > > aims' being realised must first require that you recognise that the > > > majority of the liberal ideas you have acquired (from uni studies and > > > independent research from liberal sources) are actually > > > counterproductive (or worse) to your real goals. > > > > > > I take it for granted you (all) want a world in which each child is > > > loved for its unique individual self, and is not categorised and given > > > biased treatment on the basis of its genetic codes. > > > > > > But putting people in two baskets (black/white, male/female, or > > > whatever) and comparing the baskets is absolutely certain to fail to > > > deliver impartiality to the individual as individual. Therefore ALL > > > ideological category-based social policies and laws MUST fail to give > > > you what you really want. > > > > > > But the sources that inform your world view do more than just make the > > > category mistake: they inculcate a mythology, a world view, according to > > > which all events and circumstances are judged. Consider your comment > > > above. Like all commentary from the liberal side in this and similar > > > debates, it fails to address details. A conservative like Robert Arvay > > > can write paragraph-by-paragraph commentary on the treaty (not that I > > > agree with all that he says), but the response from the liberal side is > > > always in generalities ("not impressed", "ludicrous", "can't agree", > > > etc., being among such comments I have seen here). There are two reasons > > > for this: (1) the liberals are wrong and looking too close would make > > > this hard to deny, and (2) the mythology instills an incapacity to see > > > this fact. > > > > > > In the specific case of your comment above, I have just related a case > > > (it was the bowling club case, if you recall) where men failed to gain a > > > judgement that they would have gained had they been women, so to say > > > that men "already have those rights" is fallacious; if they had the > > > rights, they would have won the case. This is so trivial and obvious > > > that a substantial reason is required as to why someone of your > > > exceptional intellectual skills could fail to see it. That reason is > > > your thrall to the leftist mythology of group-based oppression and > > > discrimination. It matters little whether the specific focus of that > > > mythology is class (as in Marxism), race, or sex; the mythos that sees > > > the world in terms of toxic malfunction caused by group-based oppression > > > is damaging, highly damaging, both in its practical consequences and in > > > its sabotage of critical thinking in all those who are infected by it. I > > > have pointed out before here, in the course of various fruitless > > > attempts to get leftists to see the truth behind even a single concrete > > > case, that this mythology is the direct opposite of Baha'u'llah's > > > principle that "All are the fruits of one tree and the leaves of one > > > branch." > > > > > > If all are the leaves of one branch, if "in this day, women are > > > accounted as men", then there is no excuse even to consider framing a > > > treaty in terms of comparison between two baskets of humans identified > > > by their genetic code: simply pass equitable laws and let the chips fall > > > where they may. > > > > > > I don't quite know how to conclude these thoughts. I do recognise that > > > the above is offensive, so for that I beg your forgiveness. It is also a > > > heartfelt plea to you, Nima, whom I greatly admire and respect, and to > > > other leftists, to start entertaining (seriously, not merely as a > > > thoughtless toss-off acknowledgement) the possibility that you do not > > > have an infallible analysis of the world in your possession. That is the > > > challenge you make to others in other circumstances, so it is fair that > > > you take it up for yourselves also. > > > > > > -- > > > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > > https://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house > > > "Every time you manage to close the door on Reality, > > > it comes in through the window." - (Unknown). > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 10:39 AM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth - Chomsky & Hobsbawm "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$oztsyg$1632$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > >> "Bahai Faith" > > Noam Chomsky et al: So discredited I can't waste my time > Nima wrote: > Discredited? Noam Chomsky is the most prominent and widely respected > leftwing intellectual in America today. Yeah, he is certainly an enfant > terrible, but those who consider him discredited are whores to big money and > media conglomerates, anyway. > Not one of my heroes. Quite the reverse. Chomsky and his kind epitomize the puerility of leftwing "intellectuals." I believe the uhj makes a grave mistake in aligning Baha'u'llah's religion with such "intellectuals" as Eric Hobsbawm in an attempt to appeal to the radicalized NGO community. I've already commented that I don't share your sweeping views of corporations and the media. More nuance is needed, in my opinion, precisely what Chomsky and Hobsbawm lack. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 8:41 AM Subject: 30,000 + hits = The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience 50+ megabytes documenting suppression of freedom of speech and conscience during the last three decades. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:23 AM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth - Chomsky & Hobsbawm "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$3zouyg$pb42$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Fred, > > I don't believe you've ever read either Chomsky or Eric Hobsbawn. Enough to recognize Marxist simplifiers when I read them.... Hayek loathed Chomsky and "intellectuals" like him, as did Russell Kirk. Kirk's The Roots of American Order is a book worth reading in its entirety. Again, I find it pathetic that the uhj has turned to such prognosticators as Chomsky and Hobsbawm.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:51 AM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth - Chomsky & Hobsbawm "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$i0cyyg$zj1$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > Fred You have not read Chomsky or Hobswam, as I thought. Enough to know where they're coming from and their radical Marxist-laden thinking is not of interest to me.... > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:agbsmp$kf33u$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > Again, I find it pathetic that the uhj has turned to such > > prognosticators as Chomsky and Hobsbawm.... > > That is bullshit, and you know it! I concede Chomsky was a slip. Hobsbawm: Quote by uhj a number of times in The Century of Light: https://bahaistudies.net/century_of_light.html My, won't that appeal to the international intelligentsia at the UN and various NGOs.... Lots of converts from that one.... PATHETIC. Reflect for one moment on Abdu'l-Baha's condemnation of the Movement of the Left.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:31 AM To: Chris40214@aol.com Subject: Re: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Chris, There's the lawsuit in New Mexico mentioned on my website. Prof. Cole has discussed the possibility and ramifications of just such a lawsuit on a number of occasions. Some his messages along those lines are on my website. See Cole under Voices of Conscience and all related links to him. If you or someone you know is seriously thinking of filing such a lawsuit, you might want to contact him. His email can be picked up from my website. Best, Frederick Glaysher >From: Chris40214@aol.com >To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com >Subject: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Date: Tue, 9 Jul >2002 03:16:45 EDT >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.100]) by >mc2-f24.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Tue, 9 Jul >2002 00:15:06 -0700 >Received: from Chris40214@aol.comby imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.21.) >id i.bb.22a11164 (3982) for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 >03:16:46 -0400 (EDT) >Message-ID: >X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10512 >Return-Path: Chris40214@aol.com >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2002 07:15:07.0056 (UTC) >FILETIME=[5A7BDB00:01C22718] > >Dear Dr. Glaysher: > >I have written to you in the past regarding your website The Bahai Faith & >Religious Freedom of Conscience. You may not remember me as this was some >time ago and, I believe, under a different screen name. I am the son of >Bahai's (my mother is deceased and my dad is an inactive member of the >Faith). I have yet to declare as, while growing up, I had noticed the very >tendencies that you shed light upon on your website. I continue to find >the >information you provide to be informative, as well as objective. I would >like to ask, have any law suits been brought about by people who were >shunned >by their local communities and/or the Universal House of Justice? Thank >you. > > > _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: https://mobile.msn.com ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:28 AM To: mereXtian@onemain.com Subject: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Please consider adding a link to my website and Prof. Juan Cole's Fundamentalism paper available from my homepage. Thank you. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: Re: The Leftist Myth - Chomsky & Hobsbawm "Brain Death" wrote in message news:5g1miuknb3f6vi3g7dms8efde3537uef0m@4ax.com... > >>Be sure to read this critique of Chomsky's writing before picking up > >>any of his books: > >> > >>https://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1020 > >> > >>The story is continued here, which explains much of the problem with > >>Chomsky's thought processes: > >> > >>https://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1018 Hey Nima, David Horowitz **IS** one of my heroes. Now what are you going to make of that.... Instead of wasting time on Hobsbawm, I suggest Horowitz's **Hating Whitey and Other Progressive Causes** or any of his other books.... Incidentally, I consider **Hating Whitey** a very Baha'i book since it truly advocates equal treatment, fairness, and justice for all human beings, regardless of victimage, unlike the fundamentalist uhj which is always attempting to curry favor with the radical fringe.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 10:56 AM Subject: bahai - uhj - corrupt adminstration - Re: Taheri resigns What's needed in the bahai "world" is someone on the uhj to resign in protest over the bastardization of Baha'u'llah's institutions. Or another person, like Culhane, to show some guts and honesty.... https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Culhane.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Kamran" wrote in message news:8a6813d4.0207100340.60a996b3@posting.google.com... > Full text of his message in persian: > > https://www.iran-emrooz.de/khabar/taheri810419.html > > By Jim Muir > BBC Tehran correspondent > > > > > A senior religious figure in Iran has resigned his post and issued a bitter > condemnation of the way the country is being run. > > Ayatollah Jalaluddin Taheri has held the post of Friday prayers speaker in the > major city of Isfahan for the past 30 years, but he has increasingly been at > odds with Iran's hardliners. > > Ayatollah Taheri's resignation came as a bombshell in the clerical > establishment that has controlled much of the power in Iran since the Islamic > revolution - in which he himself played a significant role. > > In his resignation statement, he delivered a blistering indictment of the > country's rulers that was ignored by the official media here - although the > full text was printed in reformist newspapers. > > Ayatollah Taheri said he could not close his eyes to tangible realities and > witness the stifling pain and unbearable suffering of people who were seeing > the flowers of virtue being trampled, values collapsing and spirituality being > destroyed. > > 'Corrupt' > > He went on with a bitter litany of accusations against a system that he > portrayed as deeply corrupt, self-serving, hypocritical and repressive. > > In a clear reference to the hard line vigilantes who have sometimes > interrupted his sermons in Isfahan, the Ayatollah spoke of louts and fascists > who display a mixture of ignorance and madness but whose umbilical cord is > connected to the centre of power and who are completely uncontrolled and > beyond the law. > > > He also denounced the continued house arrest of Ayatollah Hossein-Ali > Montazeri, a leading cleric who was once designated successor to Ayatollah > Khomeini, but was later disgraced. > > Ayatollah Taheri's resignation, in such a manner from a post conferred on > him by Ayatollah Khomeini himself, is unprecedented in the 23 years of the > Islamic republic. > > Growing rift > > Much of what Ayatollah Taheri had to say reflected a concern that appears to > be gaining ground within the clergy. > > But the growing rift between the powers that be and the people may be > threatening to discredit the clergy as a whole. > > While Ayatollah Taheri is associated with the reformist camp, a number of > senior conservative clerics have also recently warned that the country risks a > social explosion because of the system's failure to meet the expectations of > the people. ---------- From: Francesco Ficicchia[SMTP:ficicchia@bluewin.ch] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:04 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Info new Website (Bahai) _________________________________________________ INFO NEW WEBSITE https://www.bahai-kritik.ch eMail: info@bahai-kritik.ch BAHA’ISM (Baha’i Religion) THE RELIGION OF UNIVERSAL UNITIY History, Doctrine, Organization, Targets A critical survey Related subjects: Islam, Shi’ism, Babism, Iran, theocracy, new religions, sects, religious war, religion and politics, claim of world domination, absolutism, tolerance/intolerance language: German _________________________________________________ Francesco Ficicchia Giebeleichstraße 20 CH-8152 Glattbrugg Switzerland eMail: ficicchia@bluewin.ch ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 9:21 AM Subject: Wahhabi Bahaism - Prof. Juan Cole - University of Michigan, - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 POSTED to AOL: ---- What Juan is doing is confusing the issues. Perhaps there is no confusing and >he is only belly acheing because the Universal House of Justice did not >approve of his approach to religion. I disagree. While I don't agree with everything he's said or done, he has demonstrated he's much more honest than the uhj. "Bellyaching" minimizes too much the serious issues and injustices to which he and other people are responding. If you remember correctly, Juan >approaches the study of the Bahai Fiath by assuming that the laws and >teachings of Bahaullah were shaped by the cultuire and time in which He >lived. This is diametrically opposed to the paradigm of the teachings on this >matter. False. Baha'u'llah Himself stated that the Manifestation and His Message are always influence by his times. Cole is quite perceptive in this regard, as I state in my Amazon.com review of his book, The Millennium and Modernity. >Culture is seen to be receptive to the message of the manifestation and thus >reacts to it, not vice versa. The cause is the Prophet, not the culture. False. Sounds like the Saudis. By >looking at religious revelation in this way, Juan manages to nullify many >concepts about the autonomy and the authority of the Manifestation, He >consistently tells us how the Manifestation is limited in his understanding >of "true" issues because of the time and the culture in which He lived. We >are >told however, that Bahaullah only revealed what we were ready to hear, and >that if He had revealed all that He knew, the creation would be swept away >into oblivion. False. An extremist interpretation that seeks to fundamentalize Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Cole is not at all doing what you claim here. By taking the approach that Juan takes, it then becomes >feasable in the mind that we can change some of Bahaullahs teachings, because >after all, we know so much more than He did at the time. Only conceived as such by fundamentalists who have their own agenda, like the Wahhabi branch of Islam.... > >This is walking through a door that could lead to covenant breaking plain and >simple, > >Juan also repeatedly generalizes and makes horrid accusations against the >institutions of the Faith when he has been out of the inner circle of Bahai >life for a few years . This alone renders his statements suspect. "Horrid"? Your target is obviously the non-bahai observer uninformed about the many TENS of THOUSANDS of US citizens and others DRIVEN out of the faith by the fundamentalism of the uhj. That's ad hominem. Not at all discussing Cole's ideas, which are nowhere extreme as you try to represent them. The views of the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais are the ones that are suspect.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 8:06 AM Subject: Re: Wahhabi Bahaism - Prof. Juan Cole - University of Michigan, - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 POSTED to AOL: ---- What Juan is doing is confusing the issues. Perhaps there is no confusing and >he is only belly acheing because the Universal House of Justice did not >approve of his approach to religion. I disagree. While I don't agree with everything he's said or done, he has demonstrated he's much more honest than the uhj. "Bellyaching" minimizes too much the serious issues and injustices to which he and other people are responding. If you remember correctly, Juan >approaches the study of the Bahai Fiath by assuming that the laws and >teachings of Bahaullah were shaped by the cultuire and time in which He >lived. This is diametrically opposed to the paradigm of the teachings on this >matter. False. Baha'u'llah Himself stated that the Manifestation and His Message are always influence by his times. Cole is quite perceptive in this regard, as I state in my Amazon.com review of his book, The Millennium and Modernity. >Culture is seen to be receptive to the message of the manifestation and thus >reacts to it, not vice versa. The cause is the Prophet, not the culture. False. Sounds like the Saudis. By >looking at religious revelation in this way, Juan manages to nullify many >concepts about the autonomy and the authority of the Manifestation, He >consistently tells us how the Manifestation is limited in his understanding >of "true" issues because of the time and the culture in which He lived. We >are >told however, that Bahaullah only revealed what we were ready to hear, and >that if He had revealed all that He knew, the creation would be swept away >into oblivion. False. An extremist interpretation that seeks to fundamentalize Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Cole is not at all doing what you claim here. By taking the approach that Juan takes, it then becomes >feasable in the mind that we can change some of Bahaullahs teachings, because >after all, we know so much more than He did at the time. Only conceived as such by fundamentalists who have their own agenda, like the Wahhabi branch of Islam.... > >This is walking through a door that could lead to covenant breaking plain and >simple, > >Juan also repeatedly generalizes and makes horrid accusations against the >institutions of the Faith when he has been out of the inner circle of Bahai >life for a few years . This alone renders his statements suspect. "Horrid"? Your target is obviously the non-bahai observer uninformed about the many TENS of THOUSANDS of US citizens and others DRIVEN out of the faith by the fundamentalism of the uhj. That's ad hominem. Not at all discussing Cole's ideas, which are nowhere extreme as you try to represent them. The views of the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais are the ones that are suspect.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 2:34 PM Subject: Re: Book Review - God is Dead: Secularization in the West Thanks for posting your review here. I enjoyed reading. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Danny Yee" wrote in message news:aguhb3$hj$1@thrud.anatomy.usyd.edu.au... > God is Dead > - Secularization in the West > Steve Bruce > Blackwell 2002 > 269 pages, references, index > > A book review by Danny Yee > https://dannyreviews.com/h/God_Dead.html > > The "secularization paradigm" is not a simple single concept. Bruce's > explanation of it in chapter one of _God is Dead_ begins with a diagram > with 22 nodes (from "The Protestant Reformation" down to "Relativism" > and "Compartmentalization and privatization") connected by 26 arrows -- > and followed by twenty five pages of explanation. The core idea is that > there has been "a long-term decline in the power, popularity and prestige > of religious beliefs and rituals", brought about by modernization, or > more specifically by "individualism, diversity and egalitarianism in > the context of liberal democracy". Bruce also touches on the forces > that can act against secularization when religion becomes tied up with > ethnicity, nationalism, or even modernization itself, and on some of > the common misunderstandings about the secularization paradigm (that it > predicts the spread of atheism, for example, when it actually implies > only growing indifference to religion, not opposition). > > The remaining chapters consider different aspects of this paradigm, > presenting the basic evidence for secularization, analysing the mechanisms > behind it, addressing methodological issues, and appraising alternative > views. Bruce's approach is sociological, drawing on the tradition running > from Durkheim and Weber through to Niebuhr and Martin; and he incorporates > some theory -- for example an explanation of the "cult : sect :: church > : denomination" typology -- and enters into academic debates. But the > overall result is broadly accessible, with a good balance between theory, > statistics, and case studies. The chapters are also largely independent > -- some are based on articles published elsewhere -- and could be read > separately. > > Bruce begins with responses to revisionists who have attempted to argue > that there has not in fact been a decline in religion. Chapter two looks > back at medieval Britain: there may not have been any "Golden Age" of > faith, and both knowledge of religion and orthodoxy may have been limited, > but religious beliefs were still far more pervasive and influential > than they are now. And chapter three looks at various indicators > of the decline of Christianity in Britain over the last 150 years. > While these may not be compelling in isolation, "[a]ll of them point the > same way: declining involvement with religious organizations and declining > commitment to religious ideas". "[D]ecline is not a sociological myth". > > Many attribute secularization to the rise of science, but "no contemporary > sociologist of religion argues that Christianity has been fatally > undermined by science". The religious beliefs of scientists are, > however, quite interesting, and Bruce takes some side trips to explore > variation within disciplines, with mathematicians far more religious than > anthropologists, and similarities in "cognitive style" and epistemological > approach between some kinds of science and religion. > > The New Age movement might appear to demonstrate the existence of > widespread informal religious belief, perhaps of an "enduring need" > for religion. But Bruce's examination of the extent, nature, and > significance of that movement suggests otherwise. He concludes: > > "The New Age is eclectic to an unprecedented degree and it is > so dominated by the principle that the sovereign consumer will > decide what to believe that, even if it were the case that we > have some innate propensity to spirituality, we will not get from > where we are now to any sort of religious revival. The principle > of individual choice seems so firmly established in our culture > that ... I cannot see how a shared faith can be created from a > low-salience world of pick-and-mix religion. Furthermore, I > suspect that the New Age, weak as it has always been, will weaken > further as the children of the New Age prove indifferent to the > spiritual questing of their parents." > > The increasing presence of Eastern ideas in the West is, similarly, > no evidence against secularization. Most of it is shallow > > "Interest in Feng Sui is no more evidence of a spiritual revival > than the fashion of 'Shaker' furniture is evidence that Londoners > want to revive the nineteenth-century American Protestant sect > that originated the minimalist style." > > and it draws on the least demanding and most pliable elements > > "[Britons] are adopting the most plastic philosophical strands and > then adapting them. Central to those adaptations is the Western > stress on the authority of the autonomous individual consumer." > > The popularity of Eastern religions is also reinforced by their "underdog" > status, whereas Christianity still suffers from its historical connections > with imperialism. > > A chapter "Regression to the Mean" offers a series of brief vignettes of > minority communities that have tried to maintain distinct belief systems > and ways of life, from Scottish Presbyterians to the Amish. The key to > maintaining difference in the "uniquely hostile environment" of modern > society lies in social organisation -- and diffuse denominational and > cultic spirituality can not sustain the kinds of social organisation > needed to ward of secularization. > > A chapter on the modern British charismatic movement outlines its history, > scale and trajectory and asks if it is a counter to secularization. > Bruce concludes that > > "far from representing a radical religious alternative to the > secularization of the wider society, the charismatic movement has > been the route by which many previously conservative evangelical > Protestants have become increasingly liberal and denominational. > It is not a powerful example of a previously secular people > rejecting modernity: it is an illustration of the staged way in > which religion in Protestant cultures declines. People raised > in Baptist and Brethren churches in the 1950s used the language > of religious revitalization and reform to move out of their > stifling orthodoxy and into a setting that offered much more > flexible interpretations of Protestant doctrines. In turn, some > of their children will abandon Christianity altogether, some will > continue in the New Churches and make them ever more liberal, and > others will reject that trend and break away to form new sects. > Those new organizations will be smaller than those founded by > their parents and will gradually evolve in the same way" > > Two chapters focus on academic debates. One is a critical look at > "supply-side" theories of religion, which argue that "demand" is constant > (and high) and that levels of religious vitality therefore depend on > the supply, which is greatest when there is a free and competitive > market for "providers". Bruce finds elements of the approach useful, > but argues that it underestimates the possibilities for "auto-supply", > or "subsistence" religion, and ignores important differences between > religions. Another chapter highlights methodological problems with > surveys which supposedly show high levels of "unofficial" religious > belief: survey questions are biased, cut-offs are chosen to lump vague > support for "something out there" in with genuine religious belief, and > definitions are weakened, or twisted to redefine the secular as religious. > > Most of _God is Dead_ is about Britain, but there is a chapter on the > United States. Bruce argues that a similar process of secularization is > under way there, though it may be delayed by fifty years -- and hidden > by a tendency for people to claim more involvement with religion than > they actually have (surveys don't match actual attendance figures). > Possible reasons for the distinctiveness of the United States are its > high intake of migrants, many from less modernized countries, and the > latitude the looser federal political structure gives communities to > keep themselves separate -- political diversity allowing the freedom to > avoid cultural diversity. > > Finally, some have attempted to "hitch" religion to postmodernism, through > the latter's attacks on rationality. Secularization is not driven by > science or rationality, however, but by diversity and individual choice, > both of which are also themes of postmodernism. Which brings Bruce to > his conclusion: > > "where diversity and egalitarianism have become deeply embedded in > the public consciousness and embodied in liberal democracy, where > states remain sufficiently prosperous and stable that the fact of > diversity and the attitude of egalitarianism are not swept away > by some currently unimaginable cataclysm, I see no grounds to > expect secularization to be reversed." > > -- > > %T God is Dead > %S Secularization in the West > %A Bruce, Steve > %I Blackwell > %C Oxford > %D 2002 > %O paperback, references, index > %G ISBN 0-631-23275-3 > %P xv,269pp > %K Christianity, sociology, religion, Britain > > 10 July 2002 > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Copyright (c) 2002 Danny Yee https://danny.oz.au/ > Danny Yee's Book Reviews https://dannyreviews.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 6:33 AM Subject: Re: uhj members - spunk funk "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$aj9czg$40c$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > Have you read the *Service of Women* paper? Available at https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/SWomen.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 7:55 PM Subject: Re: uhj members - spunk funk You're welcome! Yes, I'm often here following along quietly.... willing to help out when I can. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$7cxczg$inc$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > "Bahai Faith" wrote in message > news:ah10aj$piku6$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > > news:newscache$aj9czg$40c$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > > > > Have you read the *Service of Women* paper? > > > > Available at > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/SWomen.htm > > > Many thanks to our astute sponsor ;-) > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship > > > -- > Freethought110 > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 8:05 PM Subject: Re: "Please remove my name and address from your mailing list." - In 1996 my request to the circulation department for the American Bahai "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:agvsvj$p2vhn$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > Just in case you missed it - Fred has never actually been told that he > has been disenrolled by Bobalong & Co at Wilmette. So until they > summon up the manners and courtesy to write and tell him, as far as > I'm concerned he's still a BIGS! Quite why he'd want to remain among > them is something that baffles me but there's no accounting for what > folks wants to do. > > So there you have it! God is in his heaven, Fred is still a BIGS and > all's well! Of course Fred's one of the nicer BIGS of which variety, > unfortunately, there is a severe shortage. > I'm "one of the nicer BIGS"! Now there's a compliment I appreciate! Gave my sons a mild lecture today at the dinner table about moderation, humility, and the woes brought down on all religions when adherents imagine THEY KNOW THE WILL OF GOD. I'd like to think I remain a Baha'i because I *believe* Baha'u'llah is the Manifestation of God for our time, regardless of the uhj's sullying such of his Teachings as tolerance and moderation.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Majnun9 moderator[SMTP:Majnun9-owner@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 1:01 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Invitation to join the Majnun9 group Hello FG@hotmail.com, You've been invited to join the Majnun9 group hosted by Yahoo! Groups, a free, easy-to-use community service. By joining Majnun9, you will be able to exchange messages with other group members, store photos and files, coordinate events and more. This invitation will expire in 7 days. Here's an introductory message from the group moderator: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ You are invited to Majnun9, an open and free forum for all Baha'i (and occasionally non-Baha'i related) discussions. It succeeds the original Majnun list and seeks to resurrect the cutting-edge spirit of talisman@indiana.edu. The list is free and open but partially moderated. Spamming will not be tolerated. To subscribe go to: https://groups.yahoo.com/group/Majnun9/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ JOIN NOW, IT'S EASY: 1) Go to the Yahoo! Groups site by clicking on this link: https://groups.yahoo.com/i?i=rD4G5l50k-1M0dAVoLEWyzK4ZTA&e=fglaysher%40hotmail%2Ecom (If clicking doesn't work, "Cut" and "Paste" the line above into your Web browser's address bar.) -OR- 2) REPLY to this email by clicking "Reply" and then "Send" in your email program If you do not wish to join the Majnun9 group, please ignore this invitation. SPECIAL NOTE FROM Yahoo! Groups: Because Yahoo! Groups values your privacy, it is a violation of our service rules for moderators to abuse this invitation feature. If you feel this has happened, please notify us at abuse@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to https://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 7:37 AM Subject: 2 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community....more "sectarian" "I will also argue that in the Baha'i faith, fundamentalism as a set of motifs results in a more "sectarian" as opposed to church-like community, and that fundamentalist leaders are attempting to take the community in an exclusivist direction typical of the sect in its strict sociological sense." Professor Juan Cole, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm See also Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, 2001: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: Re: Clerical Regime in Iran Tottering: What Will be Baha'i Future? Nima, Interesting speculations on all counts.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$jnoyzg$jtt$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > The clerical theocracy is tottering on the verge of a popular uprising to > the point that even former regime insiders have now begun abandoning ship > and predicting its impending collapse/implosion. History repeats itself. The > defection/abandonment/fleeing of the Shah's top lieutenants in late > 1978/early1979 was the coup de grace that weakened it sufficiently allowing > its outright overthrow by the coalition of anti-monarchist forces led by the > Ayatollah Khomeini. Last month one of the highest ranking and most senior > Ayatollahs of Iran, and the now former prayer leader of the city of Isfahan, > Siyyid Jalaleddin Taheri, resigned in protest with great fanfare and noise > addressing a strongly worded condemnatory, seething and indicting letter to > the regime's top elite and particularly its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali > Khamenei, questioning outright the clerical theocracy's continued legitimacy > in Iran listing a string of its abuses and the coninual trampling of the > legitimate rights and aspirations of the people of Iran for political > freedoms and democracy. Ironically he was shortly followed by the famous > judge-executioner of the 1979 Revolution, Ayatollah Sadeq Khalkhali. The > brother of the lame-duck President, Muhammad Khatami, who is member of the > defanged Iranian parliament, has recently gone on the record saying that due > to the failure of the reform effort increasingly the options available to > the people of Iran are being narrowed more and more down to two: 1) > continued dictatorship or 2) Revolution. While certain people have dismissed > what I have said here for years that the clerical regime will eventually > collapse under its own weight, events are more and more are proving that I > was right all along. The days of the Islamic Republic of Iran are now > incontrovertibly numbered and it is no longer a question of 'if' it will > happen but 'when'. I predict that within the next year (at most two) > significant changes will have occured in my homeland. IR celebrity defectors > aside, the number of demonstrations and acts of civil disobedeince by > average Iranian citizens throughout the country are beginning to escalate, > the loyalty of many among the armed forces and Revolutionary Guardsmen is > more and more in doubt, and as a result of this the regime's elite is daily > relying more upon foreign mercenaries to do its dirty work against the > people of Iran. > > The question/observation/advice I have is this: the excuses by those in the > Baha'i administration who have themselves thrown the veil of dictatorship > over the Baha'i community is fast approaching its end, expiration and > terminus. The Islamist regime in Iran will collapse in short order as surely > as there is a sun in the sky. What more excuses will this elite have in > continuing its own failed 'theocratic' policies? The Baha'i community in > Iran has lived under dire conditions and circumstances for the past 23 years > and it will have a rude awakening once the veil of Islamist fascism is > pulled and the veil of AO fasicsm revealed, nevertheless it will be a free > and protected community for the first time ever in its history. Furthermore > the collapse of the Khomeinist mullocracy will without a doubt bring about > among the greatest political and intellectual rennaissances the nation of > Iran has ever experienced in its history. The days of religion mongering and > faith fascism will be a closed chapter for that nation and people > forevermore. So I would like to make this direct appeal to the leadership of > the Baha'i faith to reconsider their options in light of the events that are > fast overtaking the birthplace of the Babi and Baha'i religions. The people > of Iran will NEVER again be duped by the false and empty promises of the > corrupt peddlers of religious totalitarianism of any shape or form. I would > hazard to guess that Islam as faith in that country is even finished. Should > the Baha'is behave in this post-Islamic republic and new democratic secular > Iran as they have behaved in the West and elsewhere in the past several > years, undoubtedly the scorn of the newly born free people of Iran will fall > upon the Baha'is, and the Baha'i faith will discredit itself in their eyes > in a manner the Islamists never could succeed in doing. The eyes of that > nation will be upon you as never before -- I assure you of that -- and you > bear a great responsibility precisely because the Iranian Baha'is were > brutalized and persecuted in such merciless fashion by the blood thirsty > mullocratic fundamentalists for all those years. Heed this advice and change > your policies NOW while you have the chance and open your hearts and minds > to the aspirations and hopes of those who wish live as free believing > agents. My path and your paths are no longer one. But I warn you as an old > friend whom you yourselves made into an enemy yet one who still often thinks > of your welfare: should you not heed the advice I am giving you, it will be > at your own peril -- and this is a promise. You risk destroying and > discrediting the Baha'i faith completely and utterly by your hands should > you choose not to listen. CHANGE! The winds of change in the birthplace of > Baha'u'llah are billowing with great force. The time is NOW. > > -- > Freethought110 > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: Richard III, Act 1. Scene 4. Karen Bacquet has kindly given me occasion to recall these lines from Richard III, a blackguard who murdered and deceived his way to the throne.... ...and with a piece of scripture Tell them that God bids us do good for evil; And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends, stol'n forth of Holy Writ, And seem a saint when most I play the devil. Sound familiar? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: Re: Request for Fred Glaysher Robin, Understand. Just email me using the address at the bottom right corner of my webpage: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Robin Peters" wrote in message news:20020812151757.10780.00003960@mb-ca.aol.com... > I have another request for Fred. I know why your email addy doesn't work, Fred > - you don't want spam, just like I don't want spam. > > Could you please contact me at my email addy? Hint: It's slightly different > from what it appears to be here on this post. I'm trying to avoid spam myself. > > Robin Peters > "Record casualties - my wits, as in 'frightened out of.'" > Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise > https://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460 ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 8:24 AM Subject: Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof Lev. XXV X Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof Lev. XXV X https://www.ushistory.org/libertybell/ Tomb of the Unknown Soldier of the American Revolution https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/TombURS.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 2:09 PM Subject: Re: 20 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - marginalizing or forcing out "habshi" wrote in message news:3d5cf571.20785848@news.clara.net... > Bahais are zero pecent of India's population . Stop spamming > sci with this junk Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the bahai administration proclaims widely to bahais and non-bahais in OTHER parts of the world that more than TWO MILLION Indians have joined, while MILLIONS visit the bahai house of worship in New Delhi each year. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 7:36 AM Subject: 21 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - publicly humiliated "Liberals who joined may have been made uncomfortable and encouraged to leave at much higher rates than those of a conservative or fundamentalist mindset. Several of my liberal informants who left the religion told stories of having been publicly humiliated by such officials. (The Baha'i faith retains only about 50 percent of converts, compared to 80 percent among mainstream Christian denominations)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 6:35 PM Subject: Re: A Better Class of Spammer "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:ajreu7$1d907j$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > Hi Fred, > > My deepest commiserations to you as you lose the TRB/ARB largest > number of spam posts to Usenet in one day record to Northern Ireland's > very own Number 1 Spamming BIGS, the inimitable, the one, the only > George Fleming. (Loud cheers from the audience). Actually, Dermod, my reposts do NOT constitute spamming, either as widely defined on Usenet nor by my ISP, though fundamentalists ever strive to convince people otherwise.... I submit that perhaps the counter on my website-- 31,297--or perhaps some other development, may be the impetus for this sudden assault of self-righteousness. I have added Mr. Fleming's second email address to my Message Rules. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > > Yes! Already that same quotation is winging its way here in response > to me! > > Wowee! That was close! > > Altogether now people! You know where that kill-file button is! And > remember that if it's good enough for the DST it's even better for all > of you Covenant Breakers out there, and I mean all of you! > > As ever, > > Dermod. > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 5:30 AM Subject: Re: Bobalong Bounces Critics Cole's conclusion speaks well to the latest outbreak of fanaticism: " Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 5:33 AM Subject: Re: An Arab-American Speaks Out About America "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:ajsa7b$1dr6vl$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > > As the night progressed I saw something else - a human being who has > been warped and twisted by unscrupulous hands, that now do a Pontius > Pilate, to the extent that he thought he had to do this to cleanse > this den of iniquity. Somehow or other the idea that Bahais, > non-Bahais, ex-Bahais can discuss and debate has become a redundant > concept. In many places there are BIGS like and worse than George who > have been whipped into a frenzy about Covenant Breakers at every lamp > post. > > This is the result and when they do shame the BF they are cast off > like dirty socks by those who mentored them. Let me cite Cole again: " Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 5:37 AM Subject: Re: An Arab-American Speaks Out About America "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:ajt2fq$1e1k0u$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > This is not an isolated phenomenon. Anybody who has been on the Bahai > boards at Beliefnet has seen it there as well - the airing of > difference or dissent wil bring on a tirade of abuse on the > "violators" of the Covenant. True too of AOL. Maneck, by the way, is one of the worst perpetrators of such tactics. > As for those you term CBs I got no problem with them - many are as > ill-informed as the BIGS. But they are a heck of a sight more polite > than many of the Haifan BIGS. I have yet to see one of these > non-Haifans scream the abuse that we witnessed here last night and on > other nights at Beliefnet. It is only fair and honest to acknowledge that Dermod is indeed quite correct that most of the "CBs" are more polite and tolerant than the BIGS.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 3:48 PM Subject: Re: OLDY BUT GOODY!! - Your bahai Newgroup Experience - IMPROVE IT! "Robin Peters" wrote in message news:20020820123830.26115.00001691@mb-cd.aol.com... > Freddy - > I think we can add George Fleming's email addy to this list - anyone want to do > that? Robin, I don't go by "Freddy." That's a derisive diminutive used by Maneck and others when she's displaying her scholarly credentials, they're attempting to evince bahai love, fundamentalist style, or they're violating AOL TOS rules which prohibit referring to others in any way that suggests humiliation.... I prefer Fred, Frederick, or Mr. Glaysher, thank you. By the way, did you see my note here on trb to you? Email me off my webpage (email address at the bottom left corner CONTACT) if you want to speak privately. > It would help to give OE 6 and AOHell instructions on how to killfile someone, > too, Fred. Lots of us use AOHell's newsreader, and an approximately equal > number of us use OE 6 for Usenet. Good point! I actually updated to OE 6 long ago but forgot to revise that note. I'll try to remember to do so on the next post. Given recent activity, I'm sure there will be a need for it!!@ > Finally, how about instructions on killfiling for Eudora users? Don't know the program. Others will have to figure out their own programs. Best, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 3:54 PM Subject: Re: W H A T I S T H E B A H A ' I F A I T H ? "ROBIN M PETERS" wrote in message news:y3w89.2323$oj7.267395345@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com... > It's nice that you posted this document, George, but really - why so much > activity, especially lately? The fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have often attacked talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai in late August and the early fall. It may have something to do with their just being back from bahai school where they've been whipped up into a frenzy of fanaticism to "protect" the faith, etc.... It has always seemed to me to be a concerted effort, though presented as coming from one individual.... This is definitely at least the THIRD year that this has happen about this time. It's easy enough to corroborate the fact by using the archives on google or on my website if you'd like. I believe Dermod's observation that individual fanatics are used by the administration for such purposes and then dumped when the heat gets too hot is suggestive.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:35 AM Subject: 1 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community.... reporting a major shift in the Baha'i faith "I am reporting a major shift in the Baha'i faith similar to the take-over of the Southern Baptist convention by fundamentalists in the 1980s and 1990s (Ammerman 1990)." Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm See also Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," published in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, 2001: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: Letter of Resignation - Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff - June 25, 1999 --------- Letter of Resignation - Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff - June 25, 1999 "Most distressing, though, has been the growing sense of fear that can be observed within certain parts of the Baha'i community. As an assistant, I have grown increasingly uncomfortable with the seeming need to keep track of and report on the activities of individuals, something which I initially thought to be necessary to protect the Covenant and serve the cause." Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/LetterResignationPD.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:38 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan. Abdu'l-Baha on Freedom of Conscience and Speech - Translated by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan. Palo Alto, California, 9 October 1912: "Before `Abdu l-Baha left Palo Alto, a group again had the honor of gathering in the most holy court. Among his blessed utterances was an explanation of religious conflicts, especially those of the Christians. "Some said Christ was God, and some said he was the Word, while others called him a prophet. Because of these differences, conflicts arose among them, such that in the community there was enmity instead of spirituality, and estrangement rather than unity. But Baha u llah has closed the door on such differences. By arranging for interpretation to be carried out by an authoritative Interpreter of the Book, by establishing the Universal House of Justice--or in other words the Parliament of the [Baha i] community--and by commanding that there be no interference in beliefs or conscience, He blocked such breaches from occurring. He even said that if two persons discussing some matter develope a dispute, such that it leads to a polarization, both are wrong and discredited." (Mahm£d Zarq n¡, Kit b-i Bad 'i` al-Ath r, 2 vols. (Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah '¡-Verlag, 1982), 1:294.) -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Three Types of Liberty A Talk of `Abdu l-Baha given on 7 April 1913 in Budapest He is God. Liberty is of three sorts. One is the divine freedom, that is confined to the essence of the Creator. He is autonomous and absolute. No one can compel Him with regard to anything at all. Another form of liberty is that of the Europeans, which holds that human beings may do as they please on the condition that they not harm one another. This is the liberty of nature, and its highest degree is found in the animal world. This is the estate of the animal. Look at these birds, in what liberty they live. Whatever human beings might do, they can never be as free as animals. Rather, order stands in the way of freedom. As for the third sort of liberty, it is under the divine laws and ordinances. This is the liberty of the human world, which severs the heart relationship with all things. It soothes all hardships and sorrow. The more the consciences of human beings progress, the more free their hearts become, and the more glad their spirits become. In the religion of God there is freedom of thought, for no one can rule over the [individual s] conscience save God. But [freedom of thought] exists only to the extent that it is not expressed in terms that depart from politeness. In the religion of God there is no freedom of deeds. No one can transgress the divine law, even if in so doing he harms no one. For by the divine law is intended the training of oneself and others. For to God, harming oneself or harming others are the same, and both are reprehensible. In hearts there must be the fear of God, and human beings must not commit blameworthy deeds. Therefore, the freedom of deeds that exists in civil law does not exist in religion. As for freedom of thought, it must not transgress the bounds of politeness. And deeds are also linked to fear of God and the divine good-pleasure. `Abdu'l-Ham¡d Ishr q-Kh var¡, ed., M 'idih-yi Asm n¡, 9 vols. (Tehran: Bah '¡ Publishing Trust, 1973) 5:17-18. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:39 AM Subject: Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - Abdul-Baha - freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart - "[To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. Other civilized countries acquired not this preeminence, nor attained unto these high degrees of influence and power, till such time as they put away the strife of sects out of their midst, and dealt with all classes according to one standard. All are one people, one nation, one species, one kind. The common interest is complete equality; justice and equality amongst mankind are amongst the chief promoters of empire and the principal means to the extension of the skirt of conquest. From whatever section of earth's denizens signs of contentiousness appear, prompt punishment is required by a just government; while any person who girds up the loins of endeavor and carries off the ball of priority is deserving of royal favors and worthy of splendid gifts. Times are changed, and the need and fashion of the world are changed. Interference with creed and faith in every country causes manifest detriment, while justice and equal dealing towards all peoples on the face of the earth are the means whereby progress is effected. * * * Where is this little island in the North Atlantic, and where the vast territory of the East Indies? Can such extension be obtained save by equal justice to all peoples and classes? At all events, by means of just laws, freedom of conscience, and uniform dealing and equity towards all nationalities and peoples, they have actually brought under their dominion nearly all of the inhabited quarter of the world, and by reason of these principles of freedom they have added day by day to the strength, power, and extent of their empire, while most of the peoples on the face of the earth celebrate the name of this state for its justice. As regards religious zeal and true piety, their touchstone and proof are firmness and steadfastness in noble qualities, virtues, and perfections, which are the greatest blessings of the human race; but not interference with the belief of this one or that one, demolition of edifices, and cutting off of the human race. In the middle ages, whereof the beginning was the time of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the end the capture of Constantinople at the hands of [the followers of] Islám, fierce intolerance and molestation of far and near arose in [all] the countries of Europe by reason of the paramount influence of religious leaders. The matter came to such a pass that the edifice of humanity seemed tottering to its fall, and the peace and comfort of chief and vassal, king and subject, became hidden behind the veil of annihilation. Night and day all parties were slaves to apprehension and disquietude: civilization was utterly destroyed: the control and order of countries was neglected: the principles and essentials of the happiness of the human race were in abeyance: the supports of kingly authority were shaken: but the influence and power of the heads of religion and of the monks were in all parts complete. But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction; and whereas the mightiest monarchy of Europe had been servile to and abased before the smallest government of Asia, now the great states of Asia are unable to oppose the small states of Europe. These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found. `The ways unto God are as the number of the breaths of [His] creatures' is a mysterious truth, and `To every [people] We have appointed a [separate] rite' [50] is one of the subtleties of the Qur'án." A Traveler's Narrative, originally published in 1891, 87 - 92. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:40 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. Abdu'l-Baha - "You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty." [PUP p.52] https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:05 AM Subject: 2 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community....more "sectarian" "I will also argue that in the Baha'i faith, fundamentalism as a set of motifs results in a more "sectarian" as opposed to church-like community, and that fundamentalist leaders are attempting to take the community in an exclusivist direction typical of the sect in its strict sociological sense." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:07 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise be to - wherein conscientious opinion has free sway. Abdu'l-Baha - "This is a goodly temple and congregation, for--praise be to God!--this is a house of worship [Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912] wherein conscientious opinion has free sway. Every religion and every religious aspiration may be freely voiced and expressed here. Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought, likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs--development and growth are inevitable. Therefore, this is a blessed church because its pulpit is open to every religion, the ideals of which may be set forth with openness and freedom." The Promulgation of Universal Peace, 197. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:08 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - liberty thereof produces widening of ideas Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative - "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found." --Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:08 AM Subject: "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but also freedom of *speech* and a democratic society." "Abdu'l-Baha clearly advocated not only freedom of conscience but also freedom of *speech* and a democratic society." Juan Cole, December 03, 1997 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Freedom2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:09 AM Subject: Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. Abdu'l-Baha - "Likewise, when you meet those whose opinions differ from your own, do not turn away your face from them. All are seeking truth, and there are many roads leading thereto. Truth has many aspects , but it remains always and forever one. Do not allow difference of opinion, or diversity of thought to separate you from your fellow-men, or to be the cause of dispute, hatred and strife in your hearts." --Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, 53. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Truly, this is a great and revered nation. Here liberty has reached its highest degree. The intentions of its people are most praiseworthy. They are, indeed, worthy of being the first to build the Tabernacle of the Most Great Peace and proclaim the oneness of mankind. I will supplicate God for assistance [PUP p.36-37] You are living upon the great continent of the West, enjoying the perfect liberty , security and peace of this just government. There is no cause for sorrow or unhappiness anywhere; every means of happiness and enjoyment is about you, for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. [PUP p.52] This is the century of new and universal nationhood. Sciences have advanced; industries have progressed; politics have been reformed; liberty has been proclaimed; justice is awakening. [PUP p.143] Praise be to God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious liberty, racial and personal liberty. Surely this is worthy of appreciation and thanksgiving.[PUP p.390] But when they removed these differences, persecution, and bigotries out of their midst, and proclaimed the equal rights of all subjects and the liberty of men's consciences, the lights of glory and power arose and shone from the horizons of that kingdom in such wise that those countries made progress in every direction [TN p.91] When meeting for consultation, each must use perfect liberty in stating his views and unveiling the proof of his demonstration. [BWF p.406] The third candle is unity in freedom which will surely come to pass. [SWA p.32] The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another,[SWA p.88] [To insure] freedom of conscience and tranquility of heart and soul is one of the duties and functions of government, and is in all ages the cause of progress in development and ascendency over other lands. [TNp87] The Constitutional Government, according to the irrefutable text of the Religion of God, is the cause of the glory and prosperity of the nation and the civilization and freedom of the people[TAB p. 492] https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB2.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: 3 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - forbidden to utter any public criticism "Baha'is were gradually forbidden to utter any public criticism of their religious bodies' decisions." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 9:14 AM Subject: Liberty https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Liberty.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2002 9:05 AM Subject: 4 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - ideological watchdog for the community "In 1972 it [the universal house of justice] created the "International Teaching Center" in Haifa, with nine resident Counselors, to serve as ideological watchdog for the community, among other duties." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 8:02 AM Subject: 4 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - ideological watchdog for the community "In 1972 it [the universal house of justice] created the "International Teaching Center" in Haifa, with nine resident Counselors, to serve as ideological watchdog for the community, among other duties." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 8:05 AM Subject: 5 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - organizational sectarianism "In both the Baptist and the Baha'i case, the growing prominence of fundamentalist beliefs has coincided with increased organizational sectarianism." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 5:58 AM Subject: Re: 4 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - ideologi "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:akcr24$1gtkan$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > Surely not! Fred is for quality, not quantity! Thanks Dermod for noticing! -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 6:01 AM Subject: 6 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - frankly anti-theocratic - lack scriptural support "There are two problems for Baha'i fundamentalists. The first, already noted, is that Baha'u'llah's own writings, and those of `Abdu'l-Baha are frankly anti-theocratic. The second is that in Baha'i law, oral traditions are supposed to be discounted in favor of written texts. Fundamentalists thus tend to retreat into generalities when explaining their belief, since they lack scriptural support." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 6:09 AM Subject: 6 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - frankly anti-theocratic - lack scriptural support "There are two problems for Baha'i fundamentalists. The first, already noted, is that Baha'u'llah's own writings, and those of `Abdu'l-Baha are frankly anti-theocratic. The second is that in Baha'i law, oral traditions are supposed to be discounted in favor of written texts. Fundamentalists thus tend to retreat into generalities when explaining their belief, since they lack scriptural support." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 5:31 AM Subject: 7 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - many ideals in common with the Khomeinist "Baha'i fundamentalists share many ideals in common with the Khomeinist interpretation of Shi`ite Islam, their parent religion, which also seeks governmental authority for the religious institution.... As with Islamic fundamentalism, then, one key trend is the insistence on divine governance and rejection of its negative counterpart, the modern secular state (Arjomand in Marty and Appleby 1995, 5:184)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:34 AM Subject: 8 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - suppressed historical sources "Fundamentalists select and reshape aspects of the tradition, all the while asserting that they have recaptured its pristine essence. They are also selective in their responses to modernity. They embrace some aspects of it (such as certain types of technology), while vehemently rejecting others. Baha'i fundamentalists engage in all three types of selectivity as well. They frequently make a claim to be engaging in traditional practices that are in fact innovations, and can do so with some success because the history and texts of the Baha'i faith are relatively little studied and authorities have often actively suppressed historical sources." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Grider, Dale[SMTP:dgrider2@jefferson.k12.ky.us] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:17 PM To: 'f_glaysher@hotmail.com' Subject: covenant breakers and divorce Dear Fred, I have been in some in depth discussion with a Baha'i friend concerning a comparative look at how Baha'i theology and Christian/biblical theology deal with marriage and divorce. Now in the course of my research into various Baha'i considerations on this topic, a very interesting "wrinkle" has made itself evident, yet not officially by way of any reference within the Baha'i holy writings I can find. As you know, if it isn't able to be referenced from the authoritative writings, a doctrine is at least considered suspect. I say "suspect", something short of heretical, because I suppose the UHJ has authority to interpret doctrinal answers to specific situations and circustances that would not have been relevant or even possible when the writings were set down and one might find authoriy in their official actions, even if apart from any direct reference in the writings. To get to the point, my present understanding is that if a Baha'i couple are married, and then one of the spouses becomes a "covenant breaker", the other spouse is forced to divorce the covenant breaking spouse, or themselves be subject to "excommunication" as a covenant breaker as well. I can find nothing official to substantiate this, yet it seems an assumption in all discussion group references I can find? Are there some official doctrinal statements supporting, or denying, this? If so I would really appreciate some citations as they would greatly aid my quest to better understand the doctrinal ramifications of marraige and divorce within Baha'i belief. Thanks, Dale:) please respond to: howdybud@bellsouth.net ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 5:36 AM Subject: 9 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - suppressed Persian texts, stage theory "That is, the scriptural tradition in the Baha'i faith strove for a separation of religion and state as a way of making room for liberty of conscience for Baha'is in Shi`ite Iran (Cole 1998c:17-47). Baha'i fundamentalists with theocratic leanings have used several strategies to overcome this separationist heritage in their scriptures. They have suppressed Persian texts and ensured that such anti-theocratic passages are not officially translated into English. They attempt to bound this scriptural principle as pertaining to "a particular stage" of the evolution of the faith, as in the Semple encyclical cited above. The "stage theory" of Baha'i fundamentalists allows all contradictions between scriptural principles or earlier Baha'i practice and their own vision to be resolved through relegating all contrary evidence to the status of "a past stage." The stage theory relativizes even basic Baha'i principles like the non-intervention of religion in politics, rendering them amenable to future change and even reversal, and raising the question of whether the religion permanently stands for any principle at all." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: Re: Bobalong Bounces Critics "John R MacLeod" wrote in message news:akls4k$1jdchm$1@ID-73584.news.dfncis.de... > > 6. The contradiction is real. Several quotations can be found where > Baha'u'llah allows contradictory statements to be both true. > And I'm sure one could think of more. Antinomies.... 1996 - 2000 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Antinomies.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 6:48 AM Subject: 10 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - literature review "Baha'i fundamentalists often exalt some temporary practice to the status of eternal principle. Thus, in the early twentieth century `Abdu'l-Baha initiated the practice of official prepublication censorship ("literature review") of everything written by Baha'is about their religion for publication. This was because at that time a few seditious writers from a Baha'i background could potentially cause pogroms in Qajar Iran. Shoghi Effendi referred to this requirement as "temporary" in the 1920s. Liberal Baha'is have argued in the past decade and a half that it has stifled intellectual life or is outmoded with the rise of the Internet (Leith 1995; Dialogue Editors 1998). Yet contemporary Baha'i fundamentalists strongly resist the idea that prepublication censorship should now be abolished (SRB 23 Oct. 1996, 26 Oct. 1996; UHJ 1988)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 6:54 AM Subject: Re: Hoda Mahmudi on NITV? Mahmoudi's coercive tactics regarding talk.religion.bahai and other incidents may be found at the links below. Some might want to compare Mahmoudi's tactics with those used against Kalimat Press and Juan Cole. Below, Mahmoudi is clearly intervening in the first interest poll voting for talk.religion.bahai the very day when the RESULTS we're released, revealing over 600 bahais had voted NO to oppose the formation of the newsgroup, an unprecedented number of NO votes for any poll on Usenet. Since I was the primary advocate of its creation, Mahmoudi's intentions below, to anyone familiar with how the bahai administration regularly operates, was to coerce and silence me and stop the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup forum uncontrolled by bahai fundamentalists. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm (See bottom of page) https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Mahmoudi.htm See also David Langness on Hoda Mahmoudi. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$kcum1h$388$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > I would like to draw the attention of my fellow compatriots as well as > average rank-and-file Baha'is to an issue which I believe beautifully > underscores the blatant public hypocrisy and power mongering of Baha'i > officials and those who are connected to them, and why especially > non-aligned Iranians should be ever heedful of wools being pulled over their > eyes by the PR machine of the Baha'i administration. To begin with, it is a > well known (or, rather, well claimed) principle of the Baha'i faith that > sectarian political involvement of any sort is to be shunned and is > therefore categorically prohibited to Baha'is. While this principle has not > always been meticulously adhered to either by officials or those connected > to them (i.e. Sabet, Yazdani, Ayadi, et al), nevertheless it is an issue > which has been used repeatedly to either sanction or strong-arm less well > connected (and average) Baha'is by the Baha'i leadership into compliance > with its dictates. > > Recently Ms Hoda Mahmudi, who formerly served in an official administraive > capacity as an Auxilliary Board Member for Protection (and the person sent > on the failed mission to interrogate Fredrick Glaysher for his views and > then briefly Terry Culhane), has been a regular commentator on and > contributor to the satellite opposition Iranian Television broadcasting > station NITV. The station itself, its broadcasts or its specific slant or > political views are not an issue for me, as I avidly watch it myself as well > as include myself firmly within the camp of opposition to the illegitimate > fascist totalitarian Islamist regime in Tehran which I hope will be toppled > in short order. However, I am not a Baha'i, but Hoda Mahmudi is! The > specific issue in question relates to --and one which in due time I will > disclose the full details relating thereunto to SCI, TRB and other Iranian > groups and boards on the internet -- the double standards regularly employed > by Baha'i officials to dupe a non-Baha'i public audience, on the one hand; > and the authoritarian bullying of average individual Baha'is internally who > sincerely engage in association and fellowship with other Iranians who are > non-aligned, locally and on a smaller scale, in no different terms than what > Ms Mahmoudi is doing herself in LA. Baha'i officials regularly admonish > rank-and-file Baha'is to keep far and away from their compatriots, but then > actively seek celebrity status in the name of the Baha'i faith to advance > some dubious agenda of their own with the larger Iranian community. > > That said, it has been claimed for two decades now by Baha'i officials that > any overt acts of alignment or fellowship with various non-Baha'i groups > with stated political platforms will have adverse repercussions for the > Baha'is of Iran. To any unbiased observer, Hoda Mahmudi's activities in any > capacity on the NITV network do just that -- it also gives the lie away and > a useful weapon to the IR itself to use against the Baha'is inside > Iran --and as such it is highly irresponsible of the Baha'i leadership at > this time to be foisting Ms Mahmudi on the INTV network and upon the larger > Iranian community, given the potential fallout such activities will most > definitely have for their co-religionists back home. Rank-and-file Baha'is > have been sanctioned and thus humiliated by the Baha'i leadership for far > less than what Ms Mahmudi is being led to do right now representing the > Baha'i leadership as she is on NITV. > > > -- > Freethought110 > > All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and > pernicious . > > - Ibn Warraq > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 7:54 AM Subject: Re: Hoda Mahmudi on NITV? A further note on Mahmudi: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - Notice first that Dave Fiorito's distortions during August of 2001 didn't work so enter Maneck in the fall of 2001.... To whose claims I ask, if a letter or message had been sent by me to Hoda Mahmoudi, auxiliary board member, why and how would Maneck know anything about it? The Mahmoudi message was sent to me the very morning of the day that the first voting period for talk.religion.bahai ended and the RESULTS was posted, when over 600 fundamentalists followed the advice of fanatic Mark Towfiq and others to oppose free speech and open discussion. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Towfiq.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/1stRESULT.htm If a letter was sent to Mahoudi, it addressed only that context. It's a well known fact that Maneck is Gharidian's sycophant. If she has been given a letter intended for the context of Hoda Mahmoudi's interferring in the free and unfettered voting for talk.religion.bahai, thereby violating the very Words of Abdu'l-Baha extolling freedom of speech and conscience and which led me to appeal to the uhj for an explanation of Mahmoudi's deceitful interference, let her post a copy of it on talk.religion.bahai, though it is tantamount to backbiting and further slander, in my opinion, to distort a communication in one context to fit the evil designs of a corrupted fundamentalist administration in another. See Mahmoudi's deceitfully sugarcoated, intimidating letter at the bottom of the link below. Note that Mahmoudi never asked to meet with me but to telephone her. The other claims along these lines are false, i.e., that if a letter or message was sent to Mahmoudi it was posted to Usenet. Further note that the administration is definitely interferring in free speech and conscience here on talk.religion.bahai and other online venues through their various sycophants in contradistinction to Abdu'l-Baha's elevating vision. To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/uhj12-10-99.htm I reiterate that I am under no obligation to believe the claims of vulgar liars and slanderous pseudo-academicians distorting past events and communications to fit a now different agenda. https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.g oogle.com&output=gplain I notified the nsa of my declaration of belief in Baha'u'llah in 1976. They acknowledged my declaration by sending me back the ID card available for viewing on my homepage and by accepting monetary contributions from me for years, not to mention many personal sacrifices. Further details of my participation in the bahai faith, in sundry ways, may be found in my uhj letters also accessible from my homepage. If the nsa has unilaterally changed my status as a member of the bahai faith, the obligation resides with them to notify me to that effect, which they have never done.... I urge the non-bahai looking in on this exchange to investigate and reflect carefully on the issues involved and on what they reveal about the bahai faith in practice versus theory.... Consider too that the real target of the fundamentalist attack on me may actually be the bahai community at large, to strike fear and obedience in their hearts in order to control them and to insure their submission, lest they too become the object of such a ferocious, incessant onslaught of slander and abuse.... Other relevant messages and details at https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/nsa1996.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/images/Bahai-IDgif.gif For those who think this smear campaign is something new, Google archives my being hounding by the fundamentalists along these lines for years: https://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f ilter=0 I place my trust in Baha'u'llah. And I am a Baha'i in *Perfectly* Good Standing. I repeat that if a letter was written to Mahmoudi and Maneck has a copy of it, let her post it to talk.religion.bahai.... Maneck stated I had written and posted a message to Mahmoudi on google. I've neither acknowledged nor denied that I wrote a letter to her but rather that if one exists she's free to post it to talk.religion.bahai. If such a letter ever existed, it never appeared on my website. Note: Maneck has again revealed the extent to which she works behind the scenes with the fundamentalist elements of the administration. Her obvious game here is merely to discredit and smear me with malicious charges based on distortions taken out of context. I've answered her distortions sufficiently below. Her personal insults reveal much about her and the tactics of her fellow fundamentalists who have also betrayed Abdu'l-Baha's great Words, "in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief." The link below demonstrates no such message from me to Mahmoudi exists on Google: https://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f ilter=0 And it's not on my website. Since you're the one claiming it exists and was posted on my website, it's up to you to prove it. If your bosses have given you a copy, post it here on talk.religion.bahai. Or are you a liar, who can only slander, smear, and discredit other bahais who don't share your fundamentalist interpretations with bogus claims, attempting to drive them out since you can't tolerate anyone who doesn't mirror back to you your literal-minded views.... More insight on Hoda Mahmoudi by Paul Dodenhoff who resigned from the bahai faith and his position as an Assistant to the Auxiliary Board : https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/srb95.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ See too David Langness, author of the suppressed "Modest Proposal," on Hoda Mahmoudi: "I would advise you to be careful about any meetings, calls orcorrespondence with Hoda Mahmoudi, who used to be an ABM here in Southern California. She is quite conservative, and sees herself -- as do many of the appointed branch, sadly -- as a staunch defender of the Faith and the faithful, able and more than willing to marginalize people like you and I to discredit our ideas. This cultlike practice of shunning and casting out any dissidents has unfortunately become the chief tactic of those fundamentalist Baha'is bent on maintaining the current leadership. My worry is that the more progressive Baha'is like Juan Cole and Steve Scholl and yourself will all leave the Faith and thereby increase the power of the conservatives." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aknmg5$1jv4co$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > Mahmoudi's coercive tactics regarding talk.religion.bahai > and other incidents may be found at the links below. > > Some might want to compare Mahmoudi's tactics with those used against > Kalimat Press and Juan Cole. Below, Mahmoudi is clearly intervening in the > first interest poll voting for talk.religion.bahai the very day when the > RESULTS we're released, revealing over 600 bahais had voted NO to oppose the > formation of the newsgroup, an unprecedented number of NO votes for any poll > on Usenet. Since I was the primary advocate of its creation, Mahmoudi's > intentions below, to anyone familiar with how the bahai administration > regularly operates, was to coerce and silence me and stop the creation of an > unmoderated newsgroup forum uncontrolled by bahai fundamentalists. > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm > (See bottom of page) > > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Mahmoudi.htm > > See also David Langness on Hoda Mahmoudi. > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > > > "Freethought110" wrote in message > news:newscache$kcum1h$388$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > > I would like to draw the attention of my fellow compatriots as well as > > average rank-and-file Baha'is to an issue which I believe beautifully > > underscores the blatant public hypocrisy and power mongering of Baha'i > > officials and those who are connected to them, and why especially > > non-aligned Iranians should be ever heedful of wools being pulled over > their > > eyes by the PR machine of the Baha'i administration. To begin with, it is > a > > well known (or, rather, well claimed) principle of the Baha'i faith that > > sectarian political involvement of any sort is to be shunned and is > > therefore categorically prohibited to Baha'is. While this principle has > not > > always been meticulously adhered to either by officials or those connected > > to them (i.e. Sabet, Yazdani, Ayadi, et al), nevertheless it is an issue > > which has been used repeatedly to either sanction or strong-arm less well > > connected (and average) Baha'is by the Baha'i leadership into compliance > > with its dictates. > > > > Recently Ms Hoda Mahmudi, who formerly served in an official administraive > > capacity as an Auxilliary Board Member for Protection (and the person sent > > on the failed mission to interrogate Fredrick Glaysher for his views and > > then briefly Terry Culhane), has been a regular commentator on and > > contributor to the satellite opposition Iranian Television broadcasting > > station NITV. The station itself, its broadcasts or its specific slant or > > political views are not an issue for me, as I avidly watch it myself as > well > > as include myself firmly within the camp of opposition to the illegitimate > > fascist totalitarian Islamist regime in Tehran which I hope will be > toppled > > in short order. However, I am not a Baha'i, but Hoda Mahmudi is! The > > specific issue in question relates to --and one which in due time I will > > disclose the full details relating thereunto to SCI, TRB and other Iranian > > groups and boards on the internet -- the double standards regularly > employed > > by Baha'i officials to dupe a non-Baha'i public audience, on the one hand; > > and the authoritarian bullying of average individual Baha'is internally > who > > sincerely engage in association and fellowship with other Iranians who are > > non-aligned, locally and on a smaller scale, in no different terms than > what > > Ms Mahmoudi is doing herself in LA. Baha'i officials regularly admonish > > rank-and-file Baha'is to keep far and away from their compatriots, but > then > > actively seek celebrity status in the name of the Baha'i faith to advance > > some dubious agenda of their own with the larger Iranian community. > > > > That said, it has been claimed for two decades now by Baha'i officials > that > > any overt acts of alignment or fellowship with various non-Baha'i groups > > with stated political platforms will have adverse repercussions for the > > Baha'is of Iran. To any unbiased observer, Hoda Mahmudi's activities in > any > > capacity on the NITV network do just that -- it also gives the lie away > and > > a useful weapon to the IR itself to use against the Baha'is inside > > Iran --and as such it is highly irresponsible of the Baha'i leadership at > > this time to be foisting Ms Mahmudi on the INTV network and upon the > larger > > Iranian community, given the potential fallout such activities will most > > definitely have for their co-religionists back home. Rank-and-file Baha'is > > have been sanctioned and thus humiliated by the Baha'i leadership for far > > less than what Ms Mahmudi is being led to do right now representing the > > Baha'i leadership as she is on NITV. > > > > > > -- > > Freethought110 > > > > All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and > > pernicious . > > > > - Ibn Warraq > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 10:00 AM Subject: 11 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - Internet censorship "Still, the selectivity of Baha'i fundamentalists toward modernity can be witnessed in the severe misgivings that some of them have expressed about the Internet. Some Baha'i officials have attempted to control Baha'i discourse on it. The academic talisman@indiana.edu listserv was closed down when its owner, a Baha'i professor at Indiana University, was accused by the Counselors of "making statements contrary to the Covenant" on it. Subsequently the Universal House of Justice attempted to stigmatize liberal critiques of Baha'i fundamentalism as "a campaign of internal opposition" mounted on the Internet (UHJ 1999)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 10:16 AM Subject: Your bahai Newgroup Experience - IMPROVE IT! Your bahai Newgroup Experience - IMPROVE IT! Assuming you use IE5, click on Tools, then Message Rules, followed by News. Add for talk.religion.bahai and for alt.religion.bahai the email addresses or names of the bahai fundamentalists and fanatics of your choice: smaneck@aol.com bighappymonkey@yahoo.com rlittle95@my-deja.com rlittle1@socal.rr.com kohliCUT@ameritel.net kohliCUT_THE_CAPS@ameritel.net mspmenge@msn.com postmaster@ishop-usa.com brieze_way@nospam.hotmail.com patk9018@my-deja.com RSSchaut@email.msn.NOSPAMcom saman@ticnet.com mee@tsn.cc roger@rreini.com dr.walker@fsandp.remove.com Click on Apply Now. Further word of advice based on several years online in bahai cyberspace: Also add them to Blocked Senders List. There are others you might want to add. Despite the hounding of the fundamentalists, the names above do not appear in any rank order. One of the best things about IE5 is that it is so easy to add fundamentalists as they show up or adopt false identities.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 7:19 AM Subject: 12 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - academic terms "Since the 1940s in Iran, Baha'i fundamentalism has increasingly defined itself against those Baha'is who were seen to defect to an academic point of view and who wrote of their religion within that framework. Baha'i fundamentalists are sometimes themselves engineers or scientists and do not altogether reject a scientific world-view, but they often feel it is wrong for an adherent to speak of the scripture or history of the Baha'i faith in academic terms." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 7:31 AM Subject: 13 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - anti-intellectualism "Fundamentalists draw the line at academic scholarship by Baha'is on the Baha'i faith that incorporates the perspectives of the liberal humanities and social sciences, the equivalent of "Higher Criticism" in biblical studies. Scriptural literalists, whether of the soft or hard variety, are often promoted within the ranks of the Baha'i administration, especially to the offices of "Auxiliary Board Member" and "Counselor," and they then use their offices for the promotion of anti-intellectualism." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:31 AM Subject: Re: Threats & Intimidation Nima, Given the way fundamentalists operate, you're wise to be careful and to make public knowledge any attempts to coerce and silence you. Having received many messages of Bahai harassment and hate mail, over a number of years, or endured similar threats to intimidate me into silence, it seems to me samples ought to be posted: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/hate.htm Susan Maneck has a very long and complicated history of censorship and coercion on behalf of her fundamentalist interpretations of the bahai writings. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Freethought110" wrote in message news:newscache$re9u1h$8ai$1@elise.onthenet.com.au... > It has been brought to my attention that due to my recent postings exposing > the shennanigans of the Baha'i leadership in regard to NITV, a series of > subtle and not so subtle threats have been made against my person through > third parties. > > As it is a common practice of various Iranian based cults, such as the MKO > for example, to silence their opponents through threats, initimidation (as > they once did with Nourizadeh) and sometimes assassination, I do not hold > the Baha'is above such egregious practices, particularly since I have > already been physically assaulted once before and a threat to my life made. > Therefore, should anything happen to me, I would like to inform the NGs of > soc.culture.iranian and talk.religion.bahai that I hold the Baha'is > completely and totally responsible for any violence, threats or the carrying > out of such threats and violence against me; this, especially in light of > the fact that Mr George Flemming, a Baha'i of Belfast, Northern Ireland, > recently made a threat to the life, home and loved ones of Dermod Ryder on > the talk.religion.bahai NG. > > You have been duly informed. > > -- > Freethought110 > > All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and > pernicious . > > - Ibn Warraq > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:40 AM Subject: 14 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - Baha'i Encyclopedia "The Universal House of Justice, while encouraging "scholarship," has made increasingly strong pronouncements against "humanist" and "materialist" academics in the ranks of the Baha'is. A crisis was provoked by the plan in the 1980s and 1990s of some Baha'i academics to publish a Baha'i Encyclopedia, for which they gained the backing of the U.S. NSA, which spent some $800,000 on it. The articles commissioned, however, were academic in style and substance, and the House of Justice in response condemned the then editors and their authors as scholars who "cast the Faith into a mould which is essentially foreign to its nature, taking no account of the spiritual forces which Baha'is see as its foundation . . . In other words, we are presented in such articles with the spectacle of Baha'is trying to write as if they were non-Baha'is" (UHJ 1994 in Research Department 1995:37). The editors resigned, the encyclopedia was ordered rewritten in fundamentalist style, and its Harvard-educated founder was driven out of the faith." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:36 AM Subject: 15 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - academic tools "Note that for a Baha'i simply to write about the religion using academic tools is seen as an act of aggression, an attempt to "impose" methodologies and attitudes. The insistence that the impersonal, non-theological norms of academic scholarship make it an inappropriate vehicle for Baha'i self-expression has been taken by some Baha'i authorities even to the extent of threatening to have Baha'i academics shunned over it (Birkland 1996)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:32 PM Subject: MORE FRAUD - The Virtues Project - A Baha'i Programme "The Virtues Project and The Virtues Guide produced by Linda Kavelin Popov, Dan Popov, and John Kavelin, from Canada, are being promoted as neutral values teaching programmes that will help individual children as well as school and general communities. These programmes have been promoted in suburban community newspapers, schools, university extension courses, and other contexts, as non-religious and non-sectarian." https://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/virtues.html SEE THEIR WEBSITE FOR DETAILS. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 6:03 AM Subject: 16 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - resign noisily "What appeared to him to be the UHJ's wholesale condemnation of Baha'i scholars involved in the academic study of religion caused one auxiliary board member for protection, then enrolled in a Religious Studies graduate program, to resign noisily from the faith in June of 1999." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:45 AM Subject: 17 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - drawing sharper boundaries "As for boundaries, as we have seen, in the past decade fundamentalist Baha'is have begun drawing sharper boundaries between themselves and "humanist" or "materialist" liberal Baha'is as well as between their beliefs and mainstream U.S. values." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:50 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when --- they cannot silence and cannot refute [ bahai ] "....right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." --Professor Juan Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:50 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "Suppression (that is what it was) of Dialogue magazine by --- Suppression (that is what it was) [ bahai ] "Suppression (that is what it was) of Dialogue magazine by Kazemzadeh and Henderson." Professor Juan Cole, May 13, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole30.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:51 AM Subject: "I think shunning is a human rights abuse. It may be legal (in non-tort -- threatening to prevent someone from seeing his "I think shunning is a human rights abuse. It may be legal (in non-tort situations), but then, lots of human rights abuses are legal. I don't see the difference between the Mafia organizing a conspiracy to have someone's restaurant boycotted unless he pays protection money, and a religious organization threatening to prevent someone from seeing his coreligionist relatives at reunions unless he is blindly obedient to them. Both are forms of coercion that invade privacy and detract from the autonomy and dignity of the individual." - Professor Juan Cole, February 12, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole54.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:52 AM Subject: [ bahai ] "These are the people who sent their man to my own home to - threatened with being shunned [ bahai ] "These are the people who sent their man to my own home to interrogate me and then had me (a well known professor of Middle East Studies at a major university!) threatened with being shunned unless I fell silent! If that isnt' the coercion of conscience then I don't know what is!" Professor Juan Cole, January 31, 1999 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole72.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:52 AM Subject: bahai - "That includes blowing the whistle on coercion, manipulation ----- out of kilter. bahai - "That includes blowing the whistle on coercion, manipulation and abuse by Baha'i administrators of innocent adherents. I plead for all right thinking and compassionate persons to join me in trying to reform the Baha'i administration by critiquing it. It is out of kilter. Its members know it is out of kilter. It needs to be righted. Kowtowing only keeps it out of kilter." Professor Juan Cole, October 12, 1998 https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Cole19.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 5:55 AM Subject: Australian Christians Castigate The Virtues Project - A Baha'i Programme "The Virtues Project and The Virtues Guide produced by Linda Kavelin Popov, Dan Popov, and John Kavelin, from Canada, are being promoted as neutral values teaching programmes that will help individual children as well as school and general communities. These programmes have been promoted in suburban community newspapers, schools, university extension courses, and other contexts, as non-religious and non-sectarian." https://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/virtues.html SEE THEIR WEBSITE FOR DETAILS. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 8:12 AM Subject: 18 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - authoritarian view - not Baha'is at all "Fundamentalist Baha'is have an authoritarian view of how the Baha'i "administrative order" should function. They insist on obedience, and forbid criticizing Baha'i officials or institutions. The typical logic of Baha'i fundamentalists roots obedience in the legitimacy of authority, disallowing a rational examination of the substance of a command or an inquiry into whether the body giving the command has the "constitutional" prerogative to give it. In this way, arbitrary commands by Baha'i bodies or officials are made to be an either-or proposition. If one accepts Baha'u' llah, one accepts his administrative order, and must obey whatever it orders one to do, whether one agrees in conscience or no. Rejection of the command, ipso facto, represents a rejection of Baha'u'llah (Semple 1991, McMullen 2000:66-71). Thus, fundamentalist Baha'is secretly consider liberals and some moderates "not Baha'is" at all because they do not demonstrate sufficient compliance in immersing their wills in the authority of the Baha'i administration." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 8:12 AM Subject: Re: "My "Ex-Baha'i" Story" by Karen : Re: Unenrollin' down the river Here's the text they're continuing to ignore.... "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants. So in the world of existence two persons unanimous in all grades [of thought] and all beliefs cannot be found." --Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/"Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:unl2nhp4atkn03@corp.supernews.com... > > > > > > My point - and I hope Karen's as well - is that one does not need to be > > recognized *by the Baha'i AO* as a Baha'i to be recognized as a Baha'i in > the > > wider society. There is a difference between what is popularly called a > Baha'i > > and a declared adherent of the Baha'i World Faith/International Community. > > Dear Robin, > > Actually, the point is that individual faith is a whole different matter > from membership. No organization owns the individual's heart and conscience. > That's more important than any kind of recognition from anybody. But you > are quite correct in that the wider society will see all believers in > Baha'u'llah -- whether unenrolled, Remeyite, Haifan, or any type that may > evolve in the future, as Baha'is. Outside observers aren't going to be > concerned about who is a "true" believer or a "proper" Baha'i. > > > > Popularly-labeled Baha'is are also members of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith, > > members of groups loyal to Jacques Soghomonian, and other Remeyites, as > well as > > people like John Carre. It does not matter one whit which group one > belongs to, > > but that one has faith; in this sense which I discuss, the analogy is to > > Christianity. We've been doing this shtick for literally millenia; in > fact, at > > one time, the Catholic Church felt basically the same way you do, that you > had > > to be a member to be saved (you know, the Church outside of which there is > no > > salvation, and all that.). > > Yep, and the world didn't buy that one, either. :-) There are people > following some very odd beliefs who consider themselves, and are considered > by others, Christian. Only hardcore fundamentalist Christians, and I would > suppose some hardcore Catholics, would consider the adherents of most of > those other groups to be "not Christian". Of course, Christianity has the > concept of heresy, which is "Christian, but not the right kind". The Baha'i > Faith divides the world into Baha'i, non-Baha'i, and covenant breaker. But > only a nut-case would see a person whose spiritual life is centered on > Baha'u'llah as "non-Baha'i." My guess is that as time goes on, some sort of > "heretical, but not covenant-breaker" category is going to develop. After > all, they called liberals "internal opposition", even though most of the > people it was talking about in 1999 had already resigned membership. The > very term "internal" suggests that they don't see them as being complete > outsiders. Either that, or they will eventually start calling liberals > covenant-breakers, but I don't think they really want to do that. Only > time will tell. > > Love, Karen > https://www.bacquet.tk > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 8:17 AM Subject: 19 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - 2002 - Michael McKenny - Alison Marshall "Once the Internet developed in the 1990s, liberal Baha'is began publicly expressing less absolutist understandings of infallibility, which drew the fundamentalists' ire. In the late 90s and early 00s, Canadian fantasy writer Michael McKenny and New Zealand communications consultant Alison Marshall were summarily ordered removed from the membership rolls of their respective national Baha'i communities by the Universal House of Justice. They were apparently sanctioned in this way for repeatedly making statements on email lists that seemed to fundamentalist Baha'is to bring into question the infallibility of the House of Justice and to ask for women to be allowed to serve on that body (Documents 1999). Before 1997, believers could only get off the rolls by renouncing belief in Baha'u'llah in writing, whereas McKenny and Marshall saw themselves as believers. Also, previous to 2000, the recalcitrant were extensively "counseled" before being sanctioned, but Marshall was expelled without a single meeting with any Baha'i official about her email traffic (which had never questioned the legitimacy of the House of Justice). " -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 2:55 PM Subject: Re: "My "Ex-Baha'i" Story" by Karen : Re: Unenrollin' down the river "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:unn9ue6md7pj9a@corp.supernews.com... > I kid you not; on Beliefnet, even conservatives like Dave > Fiortio or Pat Kohli have been called a part of the "Talisman invasion". > That kind of thing harms the Faith far more than anything any liberal can > do. I've seen seekers turn tail and run the other direction -- not because > of liberal critiques of the administration, but because of fundamentalists > seeing enemies lurking everywhere. So, when do these guys get called onto > the carpet by the Inquisitors? Or is that something that they only do to > liberals? Karen, After six years of observing and receiving the brunt of fanaticism in bahai cyberspace, I'd have to say NEVER, on the first count, and you got it, on the second.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 3:15 PM Subject: Fight with the Sword of the Tongue, etc. quotation? Anyone know the citation for it? Any echos out there? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 5:57 AM Subject: 20 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - marginalizing or forcing out - curbing the free expression in magazines or on email lists of liberal Baha'i "Baha'i fundamentalists appear to have concentrated on gaining control of the appointive and international institutions, and to have been less successful in securing hegemony over the U.S. National Spiritual Assembly or the annual national convention, which have a stronger democratic aspect. Their successes, in marginalizing or forcing out Baha'i academics and in curbing the free expression in magazines or on email lists of liberal Baha'i views, have had little or no impact on most local U.S. Baha'i communities and so often are unknown or not a matter of concern (cf. Ammerman 1990:259)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 7:43 AM Subject: FOR Nima - The Sick Mind of Noam Chomsky The Sick Mind of Noam Chomsky https://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1020 The Sick Mind of Noam Chomsky: Part II Method and Madness https://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1018 David Horowitz comments on your hero.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Karen Bacquet[SMTP:bacquet@tco.net] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 9:56 PM To: Dermod Ryder Cc: FG@hotmail.com; nimah110@onthenet.com.au; kashani@tpg.com.au Subject: Re: Hosts At 01:29 AM 9/10/02 +0100, you wrote: >Hi Fred, > > > I've had run-ins with Cheryl Fuller before. She's like talking to a >brick > > wall. Not really interested in figuring it all out. Hope you have >better > > luck! > >Funnily enough I was getting the impression that she is thicker than >two short planks. Hi guys! No, it isn't that Cheryl is dense -- it's that the Baha'i section is more trouble than it's worth. It's a small community compared to other sections, and has constant troubles. Look around sometime at the other religious communities. There are heated discussions, but there isn't this constant arguing over board management that goes on in the Baha'i section. Cheryl actually asked me if all this concern about board structure was somehow related to the Baha'i belief in "world order" -- i.e., if you just have the right organization, everything will be well. Another thing you should know is that Cheryl and Martha rely heavily on what the hosts tell her. That sometimes works for us -- like when they are listening to me, and sometimes works against us. > I'm going to keep this going and in the meantime >desist from posting to B'net. It might not be a bad idea if we all >did that for a while and keep the traffic down. Websites live on >hits - if we're not there the fundies have nothing to talk about so >the hits will diminish and that is exactly what Beliefnet does not >want. How they get that message is another matter, of course. I don't know, Dermod. They may just be glad the Baha'is aren't causing them problems. I think it might go better if we went with the other plan we talked about, where everybody moved to C&C. Part of the unintended consequences of my lobbying for a "haven" for liberals is that I no longer host the main debating board, and it's becoming a problem. I'm still shaking my head over the removal of the NSA letter about Convention -- because it's *copyrighted* for heaven's sake! I'm posting anything like that to Unenrolled in the future, with maybe a synopsis to Dialogue. This is another case where Cheryl doesn't know what's going on. What completely pissed me off is that they went behind my back to do that. I protested it, and didn't back down, and it looked like it would stay, and that I'd made my point with Cheryl. Then, when the UHJ decision came down, and was posted there, I discover the original letter had been taken off! So, guys, I think we're just going to have to let them have the Dialogue board, and say what you want on C&C or Unenrolled -- depending on whether you want to debate or just talk. Love, Karen >At the moment the action is on TRB and I always march to the sound of >the guns. How I love the smell of flaming fundies! > >As ever, > >Dermod. > > > > Fred > > > > > > >From: "Dermod Ryder" > > >To: "Cheryl Fuller" > > >CC: "Karen Bacquet" ,"Nima Hazini" > > >,"Fred Glaysher" >,"Rodney > > >Wicks" > > >Subject: Re: Hosts > > >Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 22:41:57 +0100 > > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > > >Received: from protactinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.176]) by > > >mc4-f34.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); >Sun, 8 Sep > > >2002 14:44:08 -0700 > > >Received: from host62-7-55-79.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([62.7.55.79] > > >helo=i8a7f3)by protactinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 >#8)id > > >17o9ql-0004hY-00; Sun, 08 Sep 2002 22:44:12 +0100 > > >Message-ID: <006701c25780$917cc9a0$4f37073e@i8a7f3> > > >References: ><9AB93D12-C0E8-11D6-9EA5-0003933F95A6@staff.beliefnet.com> > > >X-Priority: 3 > > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 > > >X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 > > >Return-Path: Grim_Reaper_Mk2@btinternet.com > > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Sep 2002 21:44:08.0921 (UTC) > > >FILETIME=[DCA7CC90:01C25780] > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Cheryl Fuller" > > >To: > > >Cc: "Martha Ainsworth" > > >Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 5:00 PM > > >Subject: Hosts > > > > > > > > > > I am sorry you are not happy with the way our hosts are dealing >with > > > > posts. We have worked hard to gather a team of Baha'i hosts, one > > >each > > > > for each of the major divisions. They have all done and continue >to > > >do > > > > excellent work in enforcing the ROC and keeping threads on the > > >boards > > > > to which they are best suited. > > > > > >As my original mail indicated, I do not agree. > > > > > > > Beliefnet has bent over backwards in an effort to accommodate >the > > > > various Baha'i groups to enable each to have protected space in > > >which > > > > to post and discuss issues of importance to them. In doing so, >we > > >have > > > > had to deal with innumerable complaints from members who want >the > > > > boards the way they believe they should be.Perhaps it is a sign >that > > >we > > > > have done our work well that no one is totally happy, as it >means > > >there > > > > has had to be compromise all the way around. > > > > > >I would agree with you and acknowledge that Beliefnet has bent over > > >backwards in its efforts to mollify certain rancorous and >vociferous > > >Bahais who are NOT in accord with the aims of Beliefnet but think >it > > >is a convenient point for their recruiting members. Sadly the host > > >who was the object of my complaint is clearly in this category; a > > >point you omitted to answer. > > > > > > > Our hosts communicate with each other and with me when they take > > >action > > > > which is likely to create a disturbance or ruffle feathers on >the > > > > boards. Many times this results in a better solution than was > > > > originally envisioned. > > > > > > > > We are and will remain firm on the issue of copyright. Members >can > > >post > > > > summaries or a sentence or two and a link but may not post whole > > > > articles unless or until they obtain formal permission to do so >and > > > > sent that to us before the piece is posted. Posting long >articles is > > > > not conducive to discussion and often serves to shut down > > >conversation. > > > > It is discussion and conversation that we wish to support and > > >encourage > > > > and we will act to nurture that. > > > > > >Many post reams of quotations from the Bahai Writings without > > >hindrance from that host. In the instance where posts of mine were > > >stolen, they were deleted purely and solely that that nefarious >action > > >be concealed. The abstracts were not especially long and easily >fell > > >within the generally accepted rule that brief abstracts can be >quoted > > >from an author without breach of copyright. But copyright was not >the > > >issue - it was raised as a smokescreen to conceal the fact that > > >fanatical Bahais go to any lengths to attempt to discredit or >silence > > >critics and when discovered plough the pits of obfuscation to cover >it > > >up > > > > > > > Further we do enforce the ROC and will continue to do so because >we > > > > wish for discussion to be vigorous *and* civil. There is not >much > > >humor > > > > to be found in terms like "weapons of mass destruction" in these > > >times. > > > > So of course posts employing language that veers into that grey >area > > > > between violence and "humor" will be removed. > > > > > >You have obviously never been to Northern Ireland where the humour >is > > >even blacker than "weapons of mass destruction." You should >perhaps > > >read the exchanges between Rodney Wicks and me where we regularly > > >employ such black humour against each other and are the best of > > >friends - Rod being an Australian with totally unworthy pretensions >to > > >being Irish, a statement he well knows I write with tongue rigidly >in > > >cheek. Being known as a somewhat outrageous exponent of this type >of > > >humour, Dust95 was once again trying to outdo me in my field of > > >exertise - he has tried before and failed. I took no offence from >it > > >and neither did he - indeed the humour has, on occasions, defused >what > > >could have built into a real flame war; it is hard to be angry when > > >you are laughing. > > > > > >You have ignored relevant matters - for instance the thread > > >"Apologies" which was deleted in its entirety. One poster >apologised > > >for the remarks he had made about certain people including me - I > > >certainly refused to accept it as I had beeen the object of a >veiled > > >threat of violence emanating from a Bahai, elsewhere in Cyberspace. > > >Apparently the original poster withdrew his apology and the entire > > >thread was deleted - history was re-written. I stayed in Dublin >for a > > >few days this past week and the hotel put me in Room 101. I just > > >cannot get away from Orwell - can I! > > > > > > > I hope you will continue to post with us. > > > > > >Why should I when my style, which is well known and much enjoyed > > >elsewhere, is being cramped by a host who knows as much about >hosting > > >as Arthur Andersen did about auditing. > > > > > >Sincerely, > > > > > >Dermod Ryder > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > Rochester Hills, Michigan USA > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: >https://messenger.msn.com > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:48 AM Subject: 21 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - publicly humiliated by such officials "Liberals who joined may have been made uncomfortable and encouraged to leave at much higher rates than those of a conservative or fundamentalist mindset. Several of my liberal informants who left the religion told stories of having been publicly humiliated by such officials. (The Baha'i faith retains only about 50 percent of converts, compared to 80 percent among mainstream Christian denominations)." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 5:44 AM Subject: 22 - Prof. Cole, University of Michigan "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - Iranian Baha'i absolutism - superior to that of local Western "Several Iranian Baha'i informants of a liberal turn of mind have said they were ostracized by their extended families because they do not accept the idea of infallibility. In turn, Iranian Baha'i absolutism may be a reaction to the persecution of the Baha'is by the Islamic Republic. Many immigrants saw their practice of the faith to be superior to that of local Western converts, which caused tensions (Cole 2000). They sometimes replied to the insecurities of immigrant status by turning to absolutism, as we saw in the Iranian-British incarnationist group. Further, the persecution gained the Baha'i organization great good will and sympathy on the part of governments and the press, making them reluctant to criticize Baha'is. Opportunistic sectarian-minded officials may have seen this press honeymoon as a time when they could act arbitrarily and harshly against intellectuals and liberals, using summary expulsion and threats of shunning, without fear of a backlash from mainstream society." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 5:58 AM Subject: Re: List serves for Bahais Link on how to access the listservs on main page. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:02 AM Subject: LIBEL & SLANDER of Fundamentalists - Two Comprehensive Intros to the Bahai Wars Two Comprehensive Intros to the Bahai Wars For those interested in understanding what's taking place regarding the Bahai Wars, I urge you to read some of the primary material on my and Professor Cole's websites and decide for yourselves. I especially recommend Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Along with Cole's survey, I also highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, as another one of the best introductions to the many conflicts and injustices that have shakened the religion during the last few decades: "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community": https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Together, Cole and Bacquet's articles, provide a comprehensive view of fundamentalism within the bahai faith today. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:03 AM Subject: 23 - Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - Fundamentalism as an ideology "Fundamentalism as an ideology gives Counselors and the UHJ far more practical power than does liberalism, which is thus seen as "undermining" that power. Given the centrality and authority of these Baha'i institutions, the ability of fundamentalists to capture them may be the most important explanation for the increasing hegemony of this tendency in the movement." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 6:33 AM Subject: Re: "I think shunning is a human rights abuse. It may be legal (in non-tort situations), but then, lots of "Randy Burns" wrote in message news:aXNf9.3013$2Z3.529@nwrddc01.gnilink.net... > Quite right, Paul H. > > Most of the "dissidents" have simply acted in a normal human manner when > they felt they were wronged and betrayed by Institutions that they loved and > admired. It actually was for many of them a decade long effort to face the > apparent fact that the Institutions don't really care for the valuable > principles of Baha'u'llah anymore, at least not when expediency calls for > something else. > > If the "dissidents" did anything wrong, it was taking the Institutions words > at face value. They failed to take note of the Nixonian commandment "watch > what we do, not what we say," and that has left them in dire straits. > > Cheers, Randy Thank you, Randy, for such a clear and straightforward statement of what and who really started the Bahai Wars and continues to fuel them. Newcomers might want to carefully reflect on your analysis and consult for themselves some of the orginal major texts available on my website. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > > Paul Hammond wrote in message > news:3d7eb5f9@212.67.96.135... > > > > Anyhow, I don't see that it's the language that the dissidents > > use that's causing the problems here. Like I said, most > > of the dissidents started out as loyalists until they were > > pushed to the extremes by the intransigence of the AO. > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 5:44 AM Subject: 24 Prof. Cole, Univ. of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - conclusion "At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is less open. Fundamentalists in the international center and their appointees in the "institutions of the learned" dislike the democratic system of governance, are committed to establishing an ultimate Baha'i theocracy, and wish to prohibit academic modes of discourse about the core areas of the religion. All of these themes, if widely adopted, would bring the religion into greater tension with the surrounding U.S. society. (The U.S. is after all a democracy committed to the separation of religion and state where nearly half of citizens go on to some form of higher education). Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: ChristianStudyCenter.com[SMTP:admin@christianstudycenter.com] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 7:08 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Your Bahai page <> Dear Mr. Glaysher, I would be more than happy to add those links onto the Baha'i page. We appreciate your support and thank you greatly. Many blessings to you, Pauline Martin CSC Editor ----- Original Message ----- From: FG To: admin@christianstudycenter.com Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:06 PM Subject: Your Bahai page https://www.christianstudycenter.com/religions/bahai.htm You might consider adding links to my website and the two articles below by Professor Cole and Karen Bacquet for surveys that your readings might find further illuminating. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm ---------- From: Francesco Ficicchia[SMTP:ficicchia@bluewin.ch] Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 9:33 AM To: FG@comcast.net Subject: critical Bahai site (www.bahai-kritik.ch) Thank you very much for your message from july 12, 2002. Please excuse my very bad English!!! My mother language is German, but I understand also Italian and Spanish. I noted the rectification of your address https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship) in my webpage www.bahai-kritik.ch ). You wrote me that you will also add my homepage address www.bahai-kritik.ch or https://www.bahai-kritik.ch ) into your site, but I can not find it. I like call your attention to the fact that the link to your website already provoked the interest of German speaking critical Baha’is and religious specialists. For that reason I think that a similar linking of my website www.bahai-kritik.ch ) in your siteyour website already provoked the interest of German speaking critical Baha' https://menbers.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship) it would to be also useful. I thank you for your attention offered to this message and remain with my best wishes and greetings from Switzerland. Francesco Ficicchia eMail: ficicchia@bluewin.ch -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Frederick Glaysher [mailto:FG@comcast.net] Gesendet: Freitag, 12. Juli 2002 18:46 An: info@bahai-kritik.ch Betreff: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience INCORRECT: www.members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship The address on your link page should be as below: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ Thanks for letting me know about your website. I'll add it to my homepage. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 7:37 AM Subject: "Dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience = Individual Conscience "Dangerous delusion from Christianity" = Individual Conscience Doug Martin, member of bahai universal house of justice: "We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith." -Doug Martin, member of bahai uhj. Full text: https://www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html (Edit>Find > "conscience") Individual conscience = " dangerous delusion from Christianity" 9/23/2001 Doug Martin, uhj member https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/DMartin.htm Compare what Abdu'l-Baha has to say on conscience: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AbdulB1.htm Brief History of Douglas Martin, member of bahai uhj https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/talisman/dmartin.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:21 AM Subject: Re: Bahai fallacy: Both bab and bahaullah Imam Mahdi??? Islamic Studies' Young Turks New generation of scholars deplores problems of Muslim world and seeks internal solutions https://chronicle.com/free/v49/i03/03a01401.htm Mahdi, Please read the above article, stop blaming others, and try to reform yourself.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship "Mr Mahdi" wrote in message news:20020930010032.12688.00008756@mb-mg.aol.com... > The false religion that came from false prophets bab and bahaullah has so many > internal contradictions in their belief that is is hilarious to even think that > it came from the Perfect God. One example of the stupidity of bahai belief is > the one that claims that bab (May God curse him) is the Imam Mahdi. > > But that in no way stops there. It gets even more interesting when you realize > that bahaullah (May God curse him) also claimed to be Imam Mahdi because he is > seen by bahais as the promised one of Islam (or the "12th Imam") or in other > words, the Mahdi. > > Now how can bahais explain this clear cut inconsistency in their belief? Who > is the "real" Imam Mahdi according to bahais? Is it bab or bahaullah? If it > was bab according to bahai belief, then bahaullah couldn't be the Mahdi because > not only the Mahdi is not two different people from bahaullah is seen as Jesus, > and Jesus will come after the Mahdi and will not be Jesus and Mahdi in the same > body. > > So if we were to take the bahai belief on who is Imam Mahdi as is, then bab > would be the Mahdi and bab would be the second coming of Mahdi as well as > Jesus! > > Again, this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the bahai faith is not from > God and that both the false prophets bab and bahaullah were imposters. > > Mahdi Muhammad > > https://brothermahdi.tripod.com/index.html ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:00 AM Subject: Eric Hobsbawm - The Party. had the first, or more precisely the only real claim on our lives. Its demands had absolute priority.... Eric Hobsbawn, the uhj's favorite historian, whom it bends over backwards to cuddle up to, in its century of "light": https://bahai-library.org/published.uhj/century.light/ What a swell party it was. . . for him (Filed: 22/09/2002) Niall Ferguson reviews Interesting Times by Eric Hobsbawm https://www.arts.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2002/09/22/bohob22 2.xml&sSheet=/arts/2002/09/22/bomain.html SOUND FAMILIAR?%*/: The essence of Communism is the abnegation of individual freedom, as Hobsbawm admits in a chilling passage: "The Party. had the first, or more precisely the only real claim on our lives. Its demands had absolute priority. We accepted its discipline and hierarchy. We accepted the absolute obligation to follow 'the lines' it proposed to us, even when we disagreed with it.We did what it ordered us to do.Whatever it had ordered, we would have obeyed. If the Party ordered you to abandon your lover or spouse, you did so." Entire article is well worth reading.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 6:21 AM Subject: The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem I'd like to mention for my friends on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai that my new book The Bower of Nil is now available, for those interested. Details below. Frederick Glaysher www.fglaysher.com The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem - Frederick Glaysher Section I of III available online at https://fglaysher.com/Bower.htm Working in the form of a book-length narrative poem, Frederick Glaysher weighs modern life in the conversation of an academic philosopher, Peter Marsh, with his Jewish businessman friend, David Emerson. Brought together after long absence by the brutal murder of Peter's wife Mary, a time of devastating loss and crisis, their friendship inspires an agonizing vigil, a dark night of the soul, during which Peter's meditations range over philosophy, politics, religion, social change, the dilemmas of existence, East and West, evoking a vision of the complexities of the 21st Century and global governance. Clearly the work of a poet grasping to embrace a larger portion of human experience than the self, The Bower of Nil reaches toward an epic vision of modern life. All the muck and glory of the human creature mix in the complex tension of a mind struggling with itself and its age. Frederick Glaysher studied writing at the University of Michigan with the African-American poet Robert Hayden, lived for more than fifteen years outside Michigan in Japan, on the Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation in Arizona, and on the Mississippi, ultimately returning to his suburban hometown of Rochester Hills with new eyes and a new vision. Glaysher is the editor of both Hayden's Collected Prose (University of Michigan Press) and his Collected Poems (Liveright). Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems (ISBN: 0-9670421-2-7) was published in 1999 by . A Fulbright-Hays scholar to China in 1994, Glaysher studied at Beijing University, the Buddhist Mogao Caves on the Silk Road, and elsewhere in China. While a National Endowment for the Humanities scholar in 1995 on India, he further explored the conflicts between the traditional regional civilizations of Asia and modernity. After growing increasingly disaffected with academic literary culture, especially the antics of deconstruction and the alienated, poete maudit mentality, he resigned from university teaching in 1996 and began a career in real estate, having now sold over eighteen million dollars worth of "bourgeois" property. An outspoken advocate of the United Nations and accredited participant at the United Nations Millennium Forum (May 22-26, 2000), Glaysher's poetry and essays take literary account of global realities. Like Whitman and many other writers, Glaysher has published in revolt against the prevailing conceptions that have become entrenched in all compartments of academic, literary, and publishing circles. The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem. ISBN: 0-9670421-7-8. LCCN: 2002105728. Cloth. Reverberations. $21.95. 71 pg. Cover art: "Sulamith," Anselm Kiefer. Publication date: October 2002 - COPIES NOW AVAILABLE Distributed by Baker & Taylor and Ingram. Online Orders: www.fglaysher.com ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@liberty.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 6:59 AM Subject: - ALERT - CAUTION - Non-bahais - Newcomers - ALERT - Non-bahais - WARNING - Non-bahais - Newcomers - CAUTION - Non-bahais - ALERT - Non-bahais - WARNING - Non-bahais I caution you that appearances may be deceiving on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. It cannot be ruled out that some of the most vociferous voices here are working on behalf of the fundamentalist bahai administration to create an atmosphere of vicious contention in order to discredit the views of others, for unsuspecting outsiders, as well as to drive them away from investigating very deeply into what is actually taking place among bahais. I highly recommend the articles below: Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, Dept. of History, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: FG[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 4:19 PM Subject: Re: THE BOWER OF NIL (Review) Thanks, Michael. I'm grateful for your good words. Let me mention that my books are available online at www.glaysher.com Or on Amazon.com, www.barnesandnoble.com/ and elsewhere as the days go by (they don't have copies in their warehouses yet.) Available internationally, Canada, UK, etc., with any major credit card!!! They take care of the exchange rate. Or orders can be placed at any bookstore through the major distributors Baker & Taylor and Ingram. The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem. ISBN: 0-9670421-7-8. LCCN: 2002105728. Cloth. Reverberations. $21.95. 71 pg. Cover art: "Sulamith," Anselm Kiefer. Publication date: October 2002 Preferred: Online Orders with immediate delivery, www.fglaysher.com (Hey, I may be a poet, but remember, I'm bucking the poete maudit tradition, and I SELL houses too!) ------- THE BOWER OF NIL, Frederick Glaysher, , Rochester, 2002 C.E. When I was asked to review this book, a modern poem, I tried to decline, because modern poetry is outside my area of expertise. I am more familiar with traditional poetry, and this was what I sought through much of the 90s for BARDIC RUNES. I recall the thrill of opening Sally Cutler's manuscript of "Elendyr" and proceeding on first reading to sing its some four hundred lines out loud. I did not sing THE BOWER OF NIL, but I did read it all the way through, as soon as it arrived. Of course, some of my background is included in that very same soil from which grew Frederick Glaysher's poem, and I hope the following remarks do not fall too far short of the competent praise I think the work deserves. THE BOWER OF NIL strikes me as very much a product of the twilight, a flower of the shadow between the past and the future. I have no idea of actual details of composition, and as I am expressing my opinion on this handiwork of the realm of inspiration, then as so many others treading this path before me, I will speak what occurs to me as a result of experiencing this artefact of the human heart. At the primary level of the mind, one can note details of form and numerous allusions to the history, philosophy and spirituality of the human species. One can observe that this is blank verse and it names people from Socrates to Kierkegaard, from Salih to Khomeini, from the Buddha to Wilson. One can observe so many details, and, for example, note a reference to the great Battle of Adrianople, and remark on scholarly controversy that the Latin account does not actually necessitate the understanding that barbarian cavalry was present. One can comment on the inclusion of a reference to THE TALE OF GENJI. There is so much in Frederick Glaysher's poem and it is as susceptible to extensive commentary as many a classical work. At the level of the emotions one can see the same humanity that so poignantly reaches across the millennia from our earliest writings; "Enkidu, where are you? Where are you, Enkidu?" (p. 25). There is the loss of companionship, of love, of meaning. There is an ages old feeling of the twilight of the present. There is the constant human concern that mortality's antidote not become sour, that our children will succeed us worthily. There is darkness of the heart, grief and despair, intensified, in my view, by the inanities of the friend of the protagonist as this friend recounts his visit as a tourist to Japan. Again, extensive commentary can be extended in this aspect of the poem. And, it is at the third level, the level of the spirit, that I would like to comment most. I suppose that one could go through this poem and underline the places where it seems so very much a product of an earlier time, noting a perhaps ever more anachronistic weighting of the fading Third Reich, and even of competition against communism and the scene of the 60s, and in the void of factual data from the poet, one can conceive of learned assertions that references to AIDS and the Taliban were later additions to a poem largely completed a few decades ago. However, I will leave such chronology aside and address the soul, as it shines to me from this book. This is a Baha'i poem and it is clear that the poet is a Baha'i. He presents the spiritual vision of Baha'i, beginning with perceived perplexities in religion, of the abandonment East and West (within Buddhism and within monotheistic religions in the West) by layman and by cleric of religion. He notes the triumph of materialistic philosophies, of materialistic goals. He sees the dark loss of hope occasioned by such repudiation of spirituality. The poem includes the dawning of the Baha'i perspective, the Baha'i vision, the Baha'i worldview of a peaceful and harmonious world federation, accepting the splendid diversity of the human species and the spiritual as well as the physical aspect of being. He alludes to and quotes from significant passages of the Baha'i prophet, Baha'u'llah, in such a manner as can leave no doubt as to his identity. This is significant, because internal Baha'i politics have made an issue of his membership, have, indeed, made an issue of the identity of the Baha'i Faith with the entity so glowingly rising to end the darkness of confusion, sorrow and despair that greet the reader when s/he opens this book. This poem dated 2002 C.E. is quite fascinating as a kind of island in a sea of history, a landmark in a mist of unrealized dreams and all the vast potential of the days that remain ahead of us. A current commentator can observe that the greatest astonishment of the past Baha'i generation has been the inability of those holding the reins of power in Baha'i to transform the kinetic energy of the Baha'i vision, so gloriously offered at the conclusion of THE BOWER OF NIL, into existing physical and spiritual essence. As a consequence, such an observer can indicate the void into which have seeped Twenty First Century wars and the astonishing scene of very divisive contentions on the Internet (itself realization, a Baha'i could adduce, of prophecy that the harmony of humanity would be facilitated by means of communication incredibly instantaneous and within the faith, but not the comprehension, of the early believers) among people calling themselves Baha'is. The awesome complexity of this current "Baha'i" reality may be explored in enormous detail, and whatever partisanship may have oozed into so brilliant an original vision, there can be no denying by any unbiased reader that THE BOWER OF NIL shines with the original vision and confirms the Baha'i identity of the poet, Frederick Glaysher. Since this poem does explore epochal issues of spirituality, and as the work also contains the lines: "Thou seest, O Father, thy people sunk again into the foul pit of paganism." (p. 50) it is not off topic for this reviewer to note that one of the most fascinating, and conceivably significant, consequences of the continued dissatisfaction by many people with monotheistic religion has been the extent to which serious attention has been devoted to restoration of traditional pre-monotheistic spirituality among many of the peoples of the planet. In conclusion, this poem is a glowing evidence of the inspirational potency of Baha'i spirituality. May it prove as interesting, as evocative and as poignantly nostalgic to all who read it at this time as it did to me. May circumstances in the future allow it to provide to those who read it then more of the thrilling pleasure and stimulating awareness of Baha'i harmonious beneficence than is possible to many readers today. Michael McKenny, October 2, 2002 C.E. -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) ---------- From: FG[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:34 PM Subject: Re: THE BOWER OF NIL (Review) by Michael McKenny Greetings, Frederick. You're welcome. My son got enthusiastic playing a computer game and kicked the modem under the desk, disabling internet access. I asked Michel Boucher to put the review up on the solarguard webpage to keep my commitment to you to have that up Wednesday or Thursday, and, gods willing it's up now. This is being typed at the house of a friend. I'm using any time provided by my absence from these NGs and the WWW to prepare my review of THE STORY OF NIGERIA which should be posted to soc.culture.african after a few days, gods willing, and also posted to the African section of the solarguard webpage. Thanks again for your enormous contribution to Baha'i in your very persistent efforts to pierce the wall of official censorship enabling efforts to be made to respond more effectively to the fundamentalist coup that has transpired within Baha'i. To the prompt, harmonioous and successful resolution of that intolerable attempt to transform Baha'i into a fundamentalist cult. Thrice Three Blessings, Michael. "Frederick Glaysher" (earthrisepress@hotmail.com) writes: > Thanks, Michael. > snip > > The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem. > ISBN: 0-9670421-7-8. LCCN: 2002105728. > Cloth. Reverberations. $21.95. 71 pg. > Cover art: "Sulamith," Anselm Kiefer. > Publication date: October 2002 > Preferred: Online Orders with immediate delivery, > www.fglaysher.com ---------- From: FG[SMTP:earthrisepress@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:47 PM Subject: Re: THE BOWER OF NIL (Review) by Michael McKenny Oops! My apologies to all. I slipped an hit the wrong key a moment ago. Anyway, thanks Michael, for the time and effort you put into your review of The Bower of Nil. I appreciate it. It is indeed posted now on your website, for those who might be interested, at https://www.geocities.com/solarguard/bahai/bower.html I don't want to create a problem but Michel Boucher may have been confused or the way he's posted it might confuse others about whether YOU or I wrote the review: 11. The Bower of Nil, A Review by Frederick Glaysher. I suggest: The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem, reviewed by Michael McKenny. And/Or add Reviewed by Michael McKenny in the text. See below how I clarified that. I hope you don't mind that I link to it from my homepage. Best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ----- Greetings, Frederick. You're welcome. {Snip} Thanks again for your enormous contribution to Baha'i in your very persistent efforts to pierce the wall of official censorship enabling efforts to be made to respond more effectively to the fundamentalist coup that has transpired within Baha'i. To the prompt, harmonioous and successful resolution of that intolerable attempt to transform Baha'i into a fundamentalist cult. Thrice Three Blessings, Michael. "Frederick Glaysher" (earthrisepress@hotmail.com) writes: > Thanks, Michael. snip > > The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem. > ISBN: 0-9670421-7-8. LCCN: 2002105728. > Cloth. Reverberations. $21.95. 71 pg. > Cover art: "Sulamith," Anselm Kiefer. > Publication date: October 2002 > Preferred: Online Orders with immediate delivery, > www.fglaysher.com ------------------ THE BOWER OF NIL, Frederick Glaysher, , Rochester, 2002 C.E. Reviewed by Michael McKenny. https://www.geocities.com/solarguard/bahai/bower.html When I was asked to review this book, a modern poem, I tried to decline, because modern poetry is outside my area of expertise. I am more familiar with traditional poetry, and this was what I sought through much of the 90s for BARDIC RUNES. I recall the thrill of opening Sally Cutler's manuscript of "Elendyr" and proceeding on first reading to sing its some four hundred lines out loud. I did not sing THE BOWER OF NIL, but I did read it all the way through, as soon as it arrived. Of course, some of my background is included in that very same soil from which grew Frederick Glaysher's poem, and I hope the following remarks do not fall too far short of the competent praise I think the work deserves. THE BOWER OF NIL strikes me as very much a product of the twilight, a flower of the shadow between the past and the future. I have no idea of actual details of composition, and as I am expressing my opinion on this handiwork of the realm of inspiration, then as so many others treading this path before me, I will speak what occurs to me as a result of experiencing this artefact of the human heart. At the primary level of the mind, one can note details of form and numerous allusions to the history, philosophy and spirituality of the human species. One can observe that this is blank verse and it names people from Socrates to Kierkegaard, from Salih to Khomeini, from the Buddha to Wilson. One can observe so many details, and, for example, note a reference to the great Battle of Adrianople, and remark on scholarly controversy that the Latin account does not actually necessitate the understanding that barbarian cavalry was present. One can comment on the inclusion of a reference to THE TALE OF GENJI. There is so much in Frederick Glaysher's poem and it is as susceptible to extensive commentary as many a classical work. At the level of the emotions one can see the same humanity that so poignantly reaches across the millennia from our earliest writings; "Enkidu, where are you? Where are you, Enkidu?" (p. 25). There is the loss of companionship, of love, of meaning. There is an ages old feeling of the twilight of the present. There is the constant human concern that mortality's antidote not become sour, that our children will succeed us worthily. There is darkness of the heart, grief and despair, intensified, in my view, by the inanities of the friend of the protagonist as this friend recounts his visit as a tourist to Japan. Again, extensive commentary can be extended in this aspect of the poem. And, it is at the third level, the level of the spirit, that I would like to comment most. I suppose that one could go through this poem and underline the places where it seems so very much a product of an earlier time, noting a perhaps ever more anachronistic weighting of the fading Third Reich, and even of competition against communism and the scene of the 60s, and in the void of factual data from the poet, one can conceive of learned assertions that references to AIDS and the Taliban were later additions to a poem largely completed a few decades ago. However, I will leave such chronology aside and address the soul, as it shines to me from this book. This is a Baha'i poem and it is clear that the poet is a Baha'i. He presents the spiritual vision of Baha'i, beginning with perceived perplexities in religion, of the abandonment East and West (within Buddhism and within monotheistic religions in the West) by layman and by cleric of religion. He notes the triumph of materialistic philosophies, of materialistic goals. He sees the dark loss of hope occasioned by such repudiation of spirituality. The poem includes the dawning of the Baha'i perspective, the Baha'i vision, the Baha'i worldview of a peaceful and harmonious world federation, accepting the splendid diversity of the human species and the spiritual as well as the physical aspect of being. He alludes to and quotes from significant passages of the Baha'i prophet, Baha'u'llah, in such a manner as can leave no doubt as to his identity. This is significant, because internal Baha'i politics have made an issue of his membership, have, indeed, made an issue of the identity of the Baha'i Faith with the entity so glowingly rising to end the darkness of confusion, sorrow and despair that greet the reader when s/he opens this book. This poem dated 2002 C.E. is quite fascinating as a kind of island in a sea of history, a landmark in a mist of unrealized dreams and all the vast potential of the days that remain ahead of us. A current commentator can observe that the greatest astonishment of the past Baha'i generation has been the inability of those holding the reins of power in Baha'i to transform the kinetic energy of the Baha'i vision, so gloriously offered at the conclusion of THE BOWER OF NIL, into existing physical and spiritual essence. As a consequence, such an observer can indicate the void into which have seeped Twenty First Century wars and the astonishing scene of very divisive contentions on the Internet (itself realization, a Baha'i could adduce, of prophecy that the harmony of humanity would be facilitated by means of communication incredibly instantaneous and within the faith, but not the comprehension, of the early believers) among people calling themselves Baha'is. The awesome complexity of this current "Baha'i" reality may be explored in enormous detail, and whatever partisanship may have oozed into so brilliant an original vision, there can be no denying by any unbiased reader that THE BOWER OF NIL shines with the original vision and confirms the Baha'i identity of the poet, Frederick Glaysher. Since this poem does explore epochal issues of spirituality, and as the work also contains the lines: "Thou seest, O Father, thy people sunk again into the foul pit of paganism." (p. 50) it is not off topic for this reviewer to note that one of the most fascinating, and conceivably significant, consequences of the continued dissatisfaction by many people with monotheistic religion has been the extent to which serious attention has been devoted to restoration of traditional pre-monotheistic spirituality among many of the peoples of the planet. In conclusion, this poem is a glowing evidence of the inspirational potency of Baha'i spirituality. May it prove as interesting, as evocative and as poignantly nostalgic to all who read it at this time as it did to me. May circumstances in the future allow it to provide to those who read it then more of the thrilling pleasure and stimulating awareness of Baha'i harmonious beneficence than is possible to many readers today. ---------- From: ChristianStudyCenter.com[SMTP:admin@christianstudycenter.com] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:42 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Your Bahai page <> Dear Mr. Glaysher, We just added the links you links you suggested and thank you again for your support. Please feel free to contact us at any time if you have to share. May God bless you abundantly, Pauline Martin CSC Editor ----- Original Message ----- From: FG To: admin@christianstudycenter.com Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:06 PM Subject: Your Bahai page https://www.christianstudycenter.com/religions/bahai.htm You might consider adding links to my website and the two articles below by Professor Cole and Karen Bacquet for surveys that your readings might find further illuminating. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 5:54 AM Subject: Re: for people know italian language - bahai - START HERE - NEWCOMERS - Please translate and post to it.cultura.religioni.bahai: bahai - START HERE - NEWCOMERS - Newcomers to talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai might want to exercise unusual caution. It will require more than a passing glance at a few messages to begin to understand what is taking place here. I suggest you begin with the links below which provide a historical survey of the last several years of bahai censorship and then visit further my and Professor Cole's websites. Cole and Bacquet's articles below provide a comprehensive view of fundamentalism within the bahai faith today. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community" published in AFF's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roll Call of Victims https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/RollCall.htm To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm The Bahai Technique ---- **Essential Reading** ---- Demonize, Discredit, Smear, Suppress, Scapegoat, Slander, Shun... etc.... https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm "Moderatore di ICRB" wrote in message news:ao4s05$j605g$1@ID-99292.news.dfncis.de... > Dear Friends, bahai or not, > > if you know italian language, and only in this case, > you could post messages in > > it.cultura.religioni.bahai > > the italian news group moderated > founded in dec 1999 > we accept post only in italian language > and we welcome you > > best regard > > Moderator of ICRB > Mr. Michele Amato > bahai_mod@libero.it > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 6:09 AM Subject: Prof. Juan Cole - "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community" - "At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is.... CONCLUDING Paragraph Reader, I invite you to weigh and decide for yourself: "At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is less open. Fundamentalists in the international center and their appointees in the "institutions of the learned" dislike the democratic system of governance, are committed to establishing an ultimate Baha'i theocracy, and wish to prohibit academic modes of discourse about the core areas of the religion. All of these themes, if widely adopted, would bring the religion into greater tension with the surrounding U.S. society. (The U.S. is after all a democracy committed to the separation of religion and state where nearly half of citizens go on to some form of higher education). Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community." Published in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, pp.109-140: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:27 PM To: madin@academicinfo.net Subject: Bahá'í Faith Last modified June 2002 Compiled and maintained by Mike Madin, a graduate of the University of Washington's Comparative Religion program.Copyright © 1996-2002 Academic Info. All rights reserved. URL: https://www.academicinfo.net/Bahai.html E-mail: madin@academicinfo.net https://www.academicinfo.net/Bahai.html ------ Please consider adding a link to my website and the following articles: Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Thank you. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:46 PM Subject: A New and Shockingly Low Level of Cynical Dishonesty and Manipulation.... >>To: Mr. George Fleming >> >>Dear Baha'i Friend, >> >>You have provided an inestimable service to the cause in your recent >>forwarding of correspondence to Dr. Cole. Rest assured that such >>measures actually were proposed by a staff member, so, there really >>was such a working copy as you forwarded along. >> >>Again, we are grateful for your conscientious efforts in defense of >>our beloved Faith. >> >>With warmest Baha'i love, >>Robert A. Hendersen >>Secretary-General ------ Dermod, It appears something new is taking place, given this laying-on of hands, as was also recently done with Susan Maneck. What do you make of it? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 7:04 AM Subject: Re: Professor Maneck's welcome wagon "Ron House" wrote in message news:3DAE2CE7.7D7925AC@usq.edu.au... >WROTE REGARDING SUSAN MANECK: > > If this were the the first, or a rare, occasion on which this specimen > had got up to this shenanigan, we might let it pass. But it is, in my > experience, her typical pattern of "debate": take something from another > poster, think out some uncharitable 'consequence' that she thinks > follows from it, and then assert as factual that the original posters > were in favour of her uncharitable interpretation. It is, imho, a > fundamentally malicious and dishonest way to conduct debate. All of which has become known to many as "The Bahai Technique": https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm Ms. Maneck's own use of "The Bahai Technique" has been widely commented upon, as has her past treatment of opinions other than her own: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm See her slandering other views as garbage: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck3.htm See her slandering other views as litter: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck7.htm See also messages related to her abuse of her AOL "position" : https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AOL.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AOLcensorship.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AOLcensorship1.htm Continuing AOL Censorship by bahais March 2001 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/AOL2001.htm Etc., etc., etc.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 7:09 AM Subject: Ron House - Is this true? Maneck has posted on AOL the message at the bottom, regarding my re-post of your message: Subject: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique Date: 10/17/2002 1:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Fglaysh12002 Message-id: <20021017130750.22706.00002808@mb-dh.aol.com> This may be of interest to people on AOL since Maneck uses the same tactics here: "Ron House" wrote in message news:3DAE2CE7.7D7925AC@usq.edu.au... >WROTE REGARDING SUSAN MANECK on talk.religion.bahai: > > If this were the the first, or a rare, occasion on which this specimen > had got up to this shenanigan, we might let it pass. But it is, in my > experience, her typical pattern of "debate": take something from another > poster, think out some uncharitable 'consequence' that she thinks > follows from it, and then assert as factual that the original posters > were in favour of her uncharitable interpretation. It is, imho, a > fundamentally malicious and dishonest way to conduct debate. For similar observations, see "The Bahai Technique": https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ MANECK'S CLAIM, TRUE? Subject: Re: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique Date: 10/17/2002 11:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Smaneck Message-id: <20021017234043.22402.00003165@mb-dh.aol.com> He's referring to the fact that I pointed out that an ex-Baha'i was trying to get Baha'is in Iran killed by suggesting the Baha'i community was involved in pro-monarchist-Zionist conspiracy. warmest, Susan ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:11 PM Subject: Re: Ron House - Is this true? In addition to the other message, I was referring to this one about Maneck. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ --- To: Dr. Susan Maneck Dear Baha'i Friend, Counselor Abdu'l-Missagh Ghadirian has shared with the National Spiritual Assembly your email exchanges regarding Nima Hazini and NITV, and it has asked that we provide you with the following guidance on its behalf. The National Assembly deeply appreciates your vigilance in correcting erroneous postings on the Internet related to the Baha'i Faith. Unfortunately, our experience with Mr. Hazini has been that he is not open to the views of others and that any response to him only tends to exacerbate the situation.The National Assembly feels, therefore, that in this case it would be best if you simply not respond to his postings and let the matter of NITV rest. Be assured, however, that the National Spiritual Assembly is looking into the various concerns that have been raised about NITV. For your information, too, it is actually Dr. Homa Mahmoudi who is involved with the NITV program. It is her sister, Dr. Hoda Mahmoudi, who was a former Auxiliary Board member and who is currently serving at the Baha'i World Center. Again, we are grateful for your conscientious efforts in defense of our beloved Faith. With warmest Baha'i regards, David L. Rouleau For the Office of the Secretary "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:aootod$ojser$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > Maneck has posted on AOL the message at the bottom, > regarding my re-post of your message: > > Subject: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique > Date: 10/17/2002 1:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: Fglaysh12002 > Message-id: <20021017130750.22706.00002808@mb-dh.aol.com> > > This may be of interest to people on AOL since Maneck > uses the same tactics here: > > "Ron House" wrote in message > news:3DAE2CE7.7D7925AC@usq.edu.au... > >WROTE REGARDING SUSAN MANECK on talk.religion.bahai: > > > > If this were the the first, or a rare, occasion on which this specimen > > had got up to this shenanigan, we might let it pass. But it is, in my > > experience, her typical pattern of "debate": take something from another > > poster, think out some uncharitable 'consequence' that she thinks > > follows from it, and then assert as factual that the original posters > > were in favour of her uncharitable interpretation. It is, imho, a > > fundamentally malicious and dishonest way to conduct debate. > > For similar observations, see "The Bahai Technique": > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm > > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > > > MANECK'S CLAIM, TRUE? > > Subject: Re: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique > Date: 10/17/2002 11:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: Smaneck > Message-id: <20021017234043.22402.00003165@mb-dh.aol.com> > > > He's referring to the fact that I pointed out that an ex-Baha'i was trying > to get Baha'is in Iran killed by suggesting the Baha'i community was > involved in pro-monarchist-Zionist conspiracy. > warmest, Susan > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:16 PM Subject: Re: A New and Shockingly Low Level of Cynical Dishonesty and Manipulation.... Here we go, in the right thread now.... Dermod, Watching fundamentalist intrigue for over six years, I can't recall ANY time when the nsa actually came out in the open and supported creatures under their control.... Nima is right that these are smoking guns. The nsa and uhj have always sought to conceal their complicity in the past. Very nasty specimens.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ --- To: Dr. Susan Maneck Dear Baha'i Friend, Counselor Abdu'l-Missagh Ghadirian has shared with the National Spiritual Assembly your email exchanges regarding Nima Hazini and NITV, and it has asked that we provide you with the following guidance on its behalf. The National Assembly deeply appreciates your vigilance in correcting erroneous postings on the Internet related to the Baha'i Faith. Unfortunately, our experience with Mr. Hazini has been that he is not open to the views of others and that any response to him only tends to exacerbate the situation.The National Assembly feels, therefore, that in this case it would be best if you simply not respond to his postings and let the matter of NITV rest. Be assured, however, that the National Spiritual Assembly is looking into the various concerns that have been raised about NITV. For your information, too, it is actually Dr. Homa Mahmoudi who is involved with the NITV program. It is her sister, Dr. Hoda Mahmoudi, who was a former Auxiliary Board member and who is currently serving at the Baha'i World Center. Again, we are grateful for your conscientious efforts in defense of our beloved Faith. With warmest Baha'i regards, David L. Rouleau For the Office of the Secretary ----- >>To: Mr. George Fleming >> >>Dear Baha'i Friend, >> >>You have provided an inestimable service to the cause in your recent >>forwarding of correspondence to Dr. Cole. Rest assured that such >>measures actually were proposed by a staff member, so, there really >>was such a working copy as you forwarded along. >> >>Again, we are grateful for your conscientious efforts in defense of >>our beloved Faith. >> >>With warmest Baha'i love, >>Robert A. Hendersen >>Secretary-General ------ Dermod, It appears something new is taking place, given this laying-on of hands, as was also recently done with Susan Maneck. What do you make of it? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:29 PM Subject: Re: Temporarily checking out.... Nima, All the best on your sundry pursuits. Enjoy your break. You know nothing around here will change.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 6:04 AM Subject: Re: Ron House - Is this true? "Ron House" wrote: > She _claimed_ that an ex-Baha'i was etc etc. And that claim was pretty > evidently false. That she has posted no evidence since to back up that > claim is also, imho, significant. Thanks, Ron, for clarifying that. I appreciate it. I had assumed such was probably the case but wanted to be sure. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Ron House" wrote in message news:3DB380CB.75C6C7CD@usq.edu.au... > Bahai Faith wrote: > > > > Maneck has posted on AOL the message at the bottom, > > regarding my re-post of your message: > >... > > MANECK'S CLAIM, TRUE? > > > > Subject: Re: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique > > Date: 10/17/2002 11:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time > > From: Smaneck > > Message-id: <20021017234043.22402.00003165@mb-dh.aol.com> > > > > He's referring to the fact that I pointed out that an ex-Baha'i was trying > > to get Baha'is in Iran killed by suggesting the Baha'i community was > > involved in pro-monarchist-Zionist conspiracy. > > warmest, Susan > > She _claimed_ that an ex-Baha'i was etc etc. And that claim was pretty > evidently false. That she has posted no evidence since to back up that > claim is also, imho, significant. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > https://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 6:09 AM Subject: Re: Ron House - Is this true? Dear non-bahai observer, newcomer: For further detail on the tactics used by Susan Maneck and other fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, see https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Bahai Faith" wrote in message news:ap0n30$q5nra$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de... > "Ron House" wrote: > > She _claimed_ that an ex-Baha'i was etc etc. And that claim was pretty > > evidently false. That she has posted no evidence since to back up that > > claim is also, imho, significant. > > Thanks, Ron, for clarifying that. I appreciate it. I had > assumed such was probably the case but wanted to > be sure. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > > > > "Ron House" wrote in message > news:3DB380CB.75C6C7CD@usq.edu.au... > > Bahai Faith wrote: > > > > > > Maneck has posted on AOL the message at the bottom, > > > regarding my re-post of your message: > > >... > > > MANECK'S CLAIM, TRUE? > > > > > > Subject: Re: Ron House Comments on Maneck's Technique > > > Date: 10/17/2002 11:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time > > > From: Smaneck > > > Message-id: <20021017234043.22402.00003165@mb-dh.aol.com> > > > > > > He's referring to the fact that I pointed out that an ex-Baha'i was > trying > > > to get Baha'is in Iran killed by suggesting the Baha'i community was > > > involved in pro-monarchist-Zionist conspiracy. > > > warmest, Susan > > > > She _claimed_ that an ex-Baha'i was etc etc. And that claim was pretty > > evidently false. That she has posted no evidence since to back up that > > claim is also, imho, significant. > > > > -- > > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > https://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house > > ---------- From: CCGM[SMTP:ccgm@ccgm.org.au] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 1:11 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: The Virtues Project - A Baha'i Programme At 07:16 AM 5/09/2002 -0400, you wrote: >ccgm@ccgm.org.au ><ccgm@ccgm.org.au> > >The Virtues Project - A Baha'i Programme >https://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/virtues.html > > >Please consider adding a link to my website >and the following articles: > >Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, >"Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," >Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm > > >Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i >Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: >https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html > > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience >https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ > CONCERNED CHRISTIANS GROWTH MINISTRIES Inc (A Christian Counter-cult Ministry) Truth Balance Compassion 50 Carcoola Street, Nollamara, WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6061 Telephone: (618) 9344 2200 Fax: (618) 9344 4226 E-mail: ccgm@ccgm.org.au Visit our Web site at: www.ccgm.org.au Rev. W.A. (Adrian) van Leen, Director Thank you for informing us of your website and its many links - with valuable information to balance the popular perceptions many have of the Baha'i faith - some of the issues we dealt with briefly in our article: Who Really Are the Baha'is? : https://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/Baha'is.html I don't know if you saw that article (as distinct from the article on the Virtues Project). I'll be in touch with our webmaster about listing you on our links page. Regards Adrian van Leen Director Concerned Christians Growth Ministries Inc. is a faith Ministry dependent on the financial support of interested and concerned people. It costs us hundreds of dollars per year to maintain our website and email services. Your donations to CCG Ministries will help us to maintain these services as part of our Ministry. Thank you. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:08 AM Subject: Australian Christians ask Who Really Are the Baha'is? Here's their answer: Who Really Are the Baha'is? : https://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/Baha'is.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 6:17 AM Subject: Re: International Religious Freedom Report: IRAN Professor Cole comments on the way things stand today in the bahai faith: "At the turn of the twenty-first century, the tendency of the movement is less open. Fundamentalists in the international center and their appointees in the "institutions of the learned" dislike the democratic system of governance, are committed to establishing an ultimate Baha'i theocracy, and wish to prohibit academic modes of discourse about the core areas of the religion. All of these themes, if widely adopted, would bring the religion into greater tension with the surrounding U.S. society. (The U.S. is after all a democracy committed to the separation of religion and state where nearly half of citizens go on to some form of higher education). Demands that liberal members avoid discussing their personal views of the faith on public email lists, and threats or sanctions launched at those who demur from the fundamentalist orthodoxy and become "prominent," all point to an increasing exclusivism more characteristic of the sect than of the church. Whereas `Abdu'l-Baha had forbidden in the tolerant Baha'i faith the Muslim custom of issuing rulings that a believer had departed into disbelief, and whereas Shoghi Effendi had insisted that believers be extensively counseled before being punished, the current leadership has initiated a new practice of summary expulsion from the rolls. The community is becoming more ready to exclude, impelled by developments in the religion's world center, by the increasing influence of fundamentalism in American religion generally, and perhaps also by the influx of immigrants, especially some Iranians, from the Third World, as well as by the transparency and consequent open conflict introduced into community discourse by the internet. The community is small and needs its resources, and so the purges have centered on a few vocal individuals rather than being more general, apparently in hopes that the remaining liberals will take the hint and keep their silence in public." -- Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community." Published in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, pp.109-140: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "OhMyGoodness" wrote in message news:mM3u9.83761$wU3.3862984@news0.telusplanet.net... > Iran > > International Religious Freedom Report > Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor > > > The Constitution declares that the "official religion of Iran is Islam and > the doctrine followed is that of "Ja'fari (Twelver) Shi'ism." The > Government restricts freedom of religion. > > There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during > the period covered by this report. Members of the country's religious > minorities--including Baha'is, Jews, Christians, and Sufi Muslims--reported > imprisonment, harassment, and intimidation based on their religious > beliefs. At least four Baha'is were among those still imprisoned for > reasons related to their faith, while eight Jews remained in prison after > being convicted in 2000 for cooperating with a hostile government, > belonging to an illegal organization, and recruiting members in an illegal > organization. > > Society is accustomed to the presence of non-Muslim communities, some of > which predate Islam. However, government actions create a threatening > atmosphere for some religious minorities, especially Baha'is, Jews, and > evangelical Christians. > > The U.S. Government makes clear its objections to the Government's > treatment of religious minorities in public statements, support for > relevant U.N. and nongovernmental organization (NGO) efforts, and > diplomatic contacts with other countries. > > In October 2001, the Secretary of State designated Iran as a "country of > particular concern" under the International Religious Freedom Act, for > particularly severe violations of religious freedom. This action followed > similar designations in September 1999 and September 2000. > > Section I. Religious Demography > > The country has a total area of approximately 631,663 square miles, and its > population is approximately 66 million. The population is approximately 99 > percent Muslim, of which 89 percent are Shi'a and 10 percent Sunni (mostly > Turkomen, Arabs, Baluchs, and Kurds living in the southwest, southeast, and > northwest). Sufi Brotherhoods are popular, but there are no reliable > figures available regarding the size of the Sufi population. > > Baha'is, Christians, Zoroastrians, Mandaeans, and Jews constitute less than > 1 percent of the population. The largest non-Muslim minority is the Baha'i > community, which has an estimated 300,000 to 350,000 adherents throughout > the country. Estimates on the size of the Jewish community vary from 20,000 > to 30,000. These figures represent a substantial reduction from the > estimated 75,000 to 80,000 Jews who resided in the country prior to the > 1979 Iranian Revolution. The Government estimates the Christian community > to number approximately 115,000 to 120,000 persons; however, the U.N. > Special Representative (UNSR) used the figure of 300,000 in a 2001 report. > The majority of the Christian population are ethnic Armenians and > Assyro-Chaldeans. There also are Protestant denominations, including > evangelical churches. The UNSR reported that Christians are emigrating at > an estimated rate of 15,000 to 20,000 per year. The Mandaeans, a community > whose religion draws on pre-Christian gnostic beliefs, number approximately > 5,000 to 10,000 persons, with members residing primarily in Khuzestan in > the southwest. > > The Government figures reported by the United Nations in 1996 place the > size of the Zoroastrian community at approximately 35,000 adherents. > Zoroastrian groups cite a larger figure of approximately 60,000, according > to the same U.N. report. Zoroastrians mainly are ethnic Persians and are > concentrated in the cities of Tehran, Kerman, and Yazd. Zoroastrianism was > the official religion of the pre-Islamic Sassanid Empire and thus played a > central role in the country's history. > > Section II. Status of Religious Freedom > > Legal/Policy Framework > > The Government restricts freedom of religion. The Constitution declares > that the "official religion of Iran is Islam and the doctrine followed is > that of Ja'fari (Twelver) Shi'ism." It also states that "other Islamic > denominations are to be accorded full respect," and designates > Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians as the only "recognized religious > minorities," which, "within the limits of the law," are permitted to > perform their religious rites and ceremonies and "to act according to their > own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education." Although > the Constitution states that "the investigation of individuals' beliefs is > forbidden" and that "no one may be molested or taken to task simply for > holding a certain belief," the adherents of religions not specifically > protected under the Constitution do not enjoy freedom of activity. This > situation most directly affects adherents of the Baha'i Faith. The > Government regards the Baha'i community, whose faith originally derives > from a strand of Islam, as a misguided or wayward "sect." The Government > fuels anti-Baha'i and anti-Jewish sentiment in the country for political > purposes. Government officials have stated that the Baha'is "are not a > religious minority, but a political organization which was associated with > the Shah's regime, is against the Iranian Revolution and engages in > espionage activities." However, government officials reportedly nonetheless > have stated that, as individuals, all Baha'is are entitled to their beliefs > and are protected under other articles of the Constitution as citizens. > > > The central feature of the country's Islamic republican system is rule by a > "religious jurisconsult." The Supreme Leader of Islamic Republic controls > the most important levers of power; he is chosen by a group of 83 religious > scholars. All acts of the Majles (legislative body) must be reviewed for > conformity with Islamic law and principles by the Council of Guardians, > which is composed of six clerics appointed by the Supreme Leader and six > Muslim jurists (legal scholars) nominated by the Head of the Judiciary and > elected by parliament. > > Religious activity is monitored closely by the Ministry of Islamic Culture > and Guidance and by the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). > Adherents of recognized religious minorities are not required to register > individually with the Government; however, their community, religious, and > cultural events and organizations, including schools, are monitored > closely. Registration of Bahai's is a police function. Evangelical > Christian groups have been pressured by government authorities to compile > and submit membership lists for their congregations, but evangelicals have > resisted this demand. Non-Muslim owners of grocery shops are required to > indicate their religious affiliation on the fronts of their shops. > > In a March 2002 meeting at the Vatican with Pope John Paul II, Speaker of > the Majles Mahdi Karrubi called for the expansion of Tehran-Vatican ties > and said that dialog among religions can promote the restoration of peace > and the elimination of violence in the world. In June 2002, Mohammad > Khamenei, brother of the Supreme Leader, told the Pope in a Vatican meeting > that dialog among religions was an ideal means for establishing global > peace and justice. > > Restrictions on Religious Freedom > > Religious minorities, by law and practice, are barred from being elected to > a representative body (except to the seats in the Majles reserved for > minorities, as provided for in the Constitution) and from holding senior > government or military positions. Members of religious minorities are > allowed to vote, but they may not run for President. All religious > minorities suffer varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, > particularly in the areas of employment, education, and housing. > > Members of religious minorities are barred from becoming public school > principals. Applicants for public sector employment are screened for their > adherence to Islam. The law stipulates penalties for government workers who > do not observe "Islam's principles and rules." Religious minorities may not > serve in the judiciary or the security services. The Constitution states > that "the Army of the Islamic Republic of Iran must be an Islamic army, > i.e., committed to an Islamic ideology and the people, and must recruit > into its service individuals who have faith in the objectives of the > Islamic Revolution and are devoted to the cause of achieving its goals." > Baha'is are prohibited from government employment. > > University applicants are required to pass an examination in Islamic > theology, which limits the access of most religious minorities to higher > education, although all public school students, including non-Muslims, must > study Islam. Applicants for public sector employment similarly are screened > for their knowledge of Islam. > > The Government generally allows recognized religious minorities to conduct > the religious education of their adherents. This includes separate and > privately funded Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian schools but does not > include Baha'i schools. The Ministry of Education, which imposes certain > curriculum requirements, supervises these schools. With few exceptions, the > directors of such private schools must be Muslim. Attendance at the schools > is not mandatory for recognized religious minorities. All textbooks used in > course work, including religious texts, must be approved for use by the > Ministry of Education. Religious texts in non-Persian languages require > approval by the authorities for use. This requirement imposes sometimes > significant translation expenses on minority communities. > > Recognized religious minorities may provide religious instruction in > non-Persian languages but often come under pressure from the authorities > when conducting such instruction in Persian. In particular evangelical > Christian and Jewish communities suffer harassment and arrest by > authorities for the printing of materials or delivery of sermons in > Persian. > > Recognized religious minorities are allowed by the Government to establish > community centers and certain cultural, social, sports, or charitable > associations that they finance themselves. This does not apply to the Baha' > i community, which since 1983 has been denied the right to assemble > officially or to maintain administrative institutions. Because the Baha'i > Faith has no clergy, the denial of the right to form such institutions and > elect officers threatens its existence in the country. > > Religious minorities suffer discrimination in the legal system, receiving > lower awards than Muslims in injury and death lawsuits, and incurring > heavier punishments. Muslim men are free to marry non-Muslim women but > marriages between Muslim women and non-Muslim men are not recognized. > > The Government is highly suspicious of any proselytizing of Muslims by > non-Muslims and can be harsh in its response, in particular against Baha'is > and evangelical Christians. > > The Government does not ensure the right of citizens to change or renounce > their religious faith. Apostasy, specifically conversion from Islam, can be > punishable by death. > > The Baha'i Faith originated in Iran during the 1840's as a reformist > movement within Shi'a Islam. Initially it attracted a wide following among > Shi'a clergy. The political and religious authorities of that time joined > to suppress the movement, and since then the hostility of the Shi'a clergy > to the Baha'i Faith has remained strong. Baha'is are considered apostates > because of their claim to a valid religious revelation subsequent to that > of Mohammed. The Baha'i Faith is defined by the Government as a political > "sect," historically linked to the Pahlavi regime and, hence, > counterrevolutionary. Historically at risk in the country, Baha'is often > have suffered increased levels of harassment and abuse during times of > political unrest. > > Baha'is may not teach or practice their faith or maintain links with > coreligionists abroad. The fact that the Baha'i world headquarters > (established by the founder of the Baha'i Faith in the 19th century, in > what was then Ottoman-controlled Palestine) is situated in what is now the > state of Israel, exposes Baha'is to government charges of "espionage on > behalf of Zionism," in particular when caught communicating with or sending > monetary contributions to the Baha'i headquarters. > > Broad restrictions on Baha'is appear to be aimed at destroying them as a > community. Baha'is repeatedly have been offered relief from mistreatment in > exchange for recanting their faith. Baha'i cemeteries, holy places, > historical sites, administrative centers, and other assets were seized > shortly after the 1979 revolution. None of the properties have been > returned, and many have been destroyed. > > Baha'is are not allowed to bury and honor their dead in keeping with their > religious tradition. They are permitted access only to areas of wasteland > that the Government designates for their use, and are not allowed to mark > the graves. Many historic Baha'i gravesites have been desecrated or > destroyed. In 2000 in the city of Abadeh, a Revolutionary Guard officer > bulldozed a Baha'i cemetery with 22 graves. > > In what appeared to be a hopeful development, in 2002 the Government > offered the Tehran community a piece of land for use as a cemetery. > However, the land was in the desert, with no access to water, making it > impossible to perform Baha'i mourning rituals. In addition the Government > stipulated that no markers be put on individual graves and that no mortuary > facilities be built on the site, making it impossible to perform a proper > burial. > > Baha'i group meetings and religious education, which often take place in > private homes and offices, are curtailed severely. Public and private > universities continue to deny admittance to Baha'i students, a particularly > demoralizing blow to a community that traditionally has placed a high value > on education. Denial of access to higher education appears aimed at the > eventual impoverishment of the Baha'i community. > > Baha'is regularly are denied compensation for injury or criminal > victimization. Government authorities claim that only Muslim plaintiffs are > eligible for compensation in these circumstances. > > A 1993 law prohibits government workers from membership in groups that deny > the "divine religions," terminology that the Government uses to label > members of the Baha'i Faith. The law also stipulates penalties for > government workers who do not observe "Islamic principles and rules." > > In 1993 the UNSR reported the existence of a government policy directive > regarding the Baha'is. According to the directive, the Supreme > Revolutionary Council instructed government agencies to block the progress > and development of the Baha'i community, expel Baha'i students from > universities, cut Baha'i links with groups outside the country, restrict > employment of Baha'is, and deny Baha'is "positions of influence," including > in education. The Government claims that the directive is a forgery. > However, it appears to be an accurate reflection of current government > practice designed to eradicate slowly the Baha'i community. > > In September 2001, the Ministry of Justice issued a report that reiterated > that government policy continued to aim at the eventual elimination of the > Baha'is as a community. It stated in part that Baha'is would only be > permitted to enroll in schools if they did not identify themselves as > Baha'is, and that Baha'is preferably should be enrolled in schools that > have a strong and imposing religious ideology. The report also stated that > Baha'is must be expelled from universities, either in the admission process > or during the course of their studies, once it becomes known that they are > Baha'is. > > While in recent years the Government has eased some restrictions, thereby > enabling Baha'is to obtain food-ration booklets and send their children to > public elementary and secondary schools, the prohibition against the > admission of Baha'is to universities remains. Thousands of Baha'is > dismissed from government jobs in the early 1980's receive no unemployment > benefits and have been required to repay the Government for salaries or > pensions received from the first day of employment. Those unable to do so > face prison sentences. > > Over the past several years, the Government has taken some positive steps > in recognizing the rights of Baha'is, as well as other religious > minorities. In November 1999, President Khatami publicly stated that no one > in the country should be persecuted because of his or her religious > beliefs. He added that he would defend the civil rights of all citizens, > regardless of their beliefs or religion. Subsequently the Expediency > Council approved the "Right of Citizenship" bill, affirming the social and > political rights of all citizens and their equality before the law. In > February 2000, following approval of the bill, the head of the judiciary > issued a circular letter to all registry offices throughout the country > that provided for any couple to be registered as husband and wife without > being required to state their religious affiliation. The measure > effectively permits the registration of Baha'i marriages in the country. > Previously Baha'i marriages were not recognized by the Government, leaving > Baha'i women open to charges of prostitution. Thus children of Baha'i > marriages were not recognized as legitimate and therefore denied > inheritance rights. > > While Jews are a recognized religious minority, allegations of official > discrimination are frequent. The Government's anti-Israel policies, along > with a perception among radical Muslim elements that Jewish citizens > support Zionism and the State of Israel, create a threatening atmosphere > for the small Jewish community. Jewish leaders reportedly are reluctant to > draw attention to official mistreatment of their community due to fear of > government reprisal. > > In principle with some exceptions, there appears to be little restriction > or interference with the religious practice of Judaism. However, education > of Jewish children has become more difficult in recent years. The > Government reportedly allows the teaching of Hebrew, recognizing that it is > necessary for Jewish religious practice. However, it strongly discourages > teachers from distributing Hebrew texts to students, in practice making it > difficult to teach the language. Moreover, the Government has required that > several Jewish schools remain open on Saturdays, the Jewish Sabbath, in > conformity with the schedule of other schools in the school system. Because > working or attending school on the Sabbath violates Jewish religious law, > this requirement has made it difficult for observant Jews to both attend > school and adhere to important tenets of their religion. > > Jews are permitted to obtain passports and to travel outside the country, > but often are denied the multiple-exit permits that normally are issued to > citizens. With the exception of certain business travelers, Jews are > required by the authorities to obtain clearance (and pay additional fees) > before each trip abroad. The Government appears concerned about the > emigration of Jews and permission generally is not granted for all members > of a Jewish family to travel outside the country at the same time. Jews > were removed progressively from government positions after the 1979 > revolution. > > According to the U.N. High Commission for Refugees Background Paper on > Iran, the Mandaeans are regarded as Christians, and are included among the > country's three recognized religious minorities. However, Mandaeans regard > themselves not as Christians, but as adherents of a religion that predates > Christianity in both belief and practice. Mandaeans enjoyed official > support as a distinct religion prior to the revolution, but their legal > status as a religion since then has been the subject of debate in the > Majles and never has been clarified. The small community faces > discrimination similar to that faced by the country's other religious > minorities. > > Although Sunni Muslims are accorded full respect under the terms of the > Constitution, some groups claim to be discriminated against by the > Government. In particular Sunnis cite the lack of a Sunni mosque in Tehran, > and claim that authorities refuse to authorize construction of a Sunni > place of worship in the capital. Sunnis also have accused the state > broadcasting company of airing programming insulting to Sunnis. > > Sufi organizations outside the country remain concerned about repression by > the authorities of Sufi religious practices. > > Shortly after the 1979 revolution, the Government repealed the Family > Protection Law, a hallmark bill that was adopted in 1967, providing women > with increased rights in the home and workplace, and replaced it with a > legal system based largely on Shari'a (Islamic law). The Government > enforces gender segregation in most public spaces, and prohibits women from > interacting openly with unmarried men or men not related to them. Women > must ride in a reserved section on public buses and enter public buildings, > universities, and airports through separate entrances. Women are prohibited > from attending male sporting events, although this restriction does not > appear to be enforced universally. While the enforcement of conservative > Islamic dress codes has varied with the political climate since the death > of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989, what women wear in public is not entirely a > matter of personal choice. Women are subject to harassment by the > authorities if their dress or behavior is considered inappropriate and may > be sentenced to flogging or imprisonment for such violations. The law > prohibits the publication of pictures of uncovered women in the print > media, including pictures of foreign women. There are penalties for failure > to observe Islamic dress codes at work. > > In 1998 the Majles passed legislation that mandated segregation of the > sexes in the provision of medical care. The bill provided for women to be > treated only by female physicians and men by male physicians, which raised > questions about the quality of care that women could receive under such a > regime, considering the current imbalance between the number of trained and > licensed male and female physicians and specialists. > > Muslim women may not marry non-Muslim men. The testimony of a woman is > worth only half that of a man in court. A married woman must obtain the > written consent of her husband before traveling outside the country. > > In October 2000, the Majles passed a bill to raise the legal age of > marriage for women from 9 to 15. However, in November 2000, the Council of > Guardians rejected the bill as contrary to Islamic law, although even under > the current law, marriage at the minimum age is rare. All women, no matter > the age, must have the permission of their father or a living male relative > in order to marry. The law allows for the practice of Siqeh, or temporary > marriage, a Shi'a custom in which a woman or a girl may become the wife of > a married or single Muslim male after a simple and brief religious > ceremony. The Siqeh marriage may last for a night or as little as 30 > minutes. The bond is not recorded on identification documents, and, > according to Islamic law, men may have as many Siqeh wives as they wish. > Such wives are not granted rights associated with traditional marriage. > > Under legislation passed in 1983, women have the right to divorce, and > regulations promulgated in 1984 substantially broadened the grounds on > which a woman may seek a divorce. However, a husband is not required to > cite a reason for divorcing his wife. In 1986 the Government issued a > 12-point "contract" to serve as a model for marriage and divorce, which > limits the privileges accorded to men by custom and traditional > interpretations of Islamic law. The model contract also recognized a > divorced woman's right to a share in the property that couples acquire > during their marriage and to increased alimony rights. Women who remarry > are forced to give up custody of children from earlier marriages to the > child's father. In 1998 the Majles passed a law that granted custody of > minor children to the mother in certain divorce cases in which the father > is proven unfit to care for the child. The measure was enacted because of > the complaints of mothers who had lost custody of their children to former > husbands with drug addictions and criminal records. > > Abuses of Religious Freedom > > According to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United > States, since 1979 more than 200 Baha'is have been killed and 15 have > disappeared and are presumed dead. The Government continued to imprison and > detain Baha'is based on their religious beliefs. > > The Government appears to adhere to a practice of keeping a small number of > Baha'is in arbitrary detention, some at risk of execution, at any given > time. There were four Baha'is reported to be in prison for practicing their > faith at the end of the period covered by this report, two facing life > sentences and two facing sentences of 15 years. In addition the Government > appears to engage in harassment of the Baha'i community by arresting > Baha'is arbitrarily, charging them, and then releasing them, often without > dropping the charges against them. Those with charges still pending against > them fear arrest at any time. > > Two Baha'is, Sirus Zabihi-Moghaddam and Hadayat Kashefi-Najafabadi, were > tried in 1998 and later sentenced to death by a revolutionary court in > Mashad for practicing their faith. In 2000 the sentences were reduced to 7 > and 5 years respectively. Kashefi-Najafabadi was released in October 2001, > after serving 4 years of his sentence. Zabihi-Moghaddam, who originally was > arrested in November 1997, was released in June 2002. > > The Government continued to imprison and detain Baha'is based on their > religious beliefs. Manuchehr Khulusi was arrested in June 1999 while > visiting fellow Baha'is in the town of Birjand, and was imprisoned until > his release in May 2000. During his imprisonment, Khulusi was interrogated, > beaten, held in solitary confinement, and denied access to his lawyer. The > charges brought against him remain unknown, but they were believed to be > related to his faith. The Islamic Revolutionary Court in Mashhad held a > 2-day trial in September 1999 and sentenced Khulusi to death in February > 2000. Despite Khulusi's release, it is unclear if the conviction and death > sentence against him still stand. > > The property rights of Baha'is generally are disregarded. Since 1979 large > numbers of private and business properties belonging to Baha'is have been > confiscated. During the period covered by this report, 14 Baha'i homes were > seized and handed over to an agency of Supreme Leader Khamene'i. > Authorities reportedly confiscated Baha'i properties in Kata and forced > several families to leave their homes and farmlands. Authorities also > imprisoned some farmers, and did not permit others to harvest their crops. > In 2000 authorities in Tehran, Isfahan, and Shiraz reportedly also > confiscated eight buildings belonging to Baha'is. In one instance, a woman > from Isfahan who legally traveled abroad found that her home had been > confiscated when she returned home. During the period covered by the > report, the Government also seized private homes in which Baha'i youth > classes were held despite the owners having proper ownership documents. In > 1999 three Baha'i homes in Yazd and one in Arbakan were confiscated because > their owners were Baha'is. The Government's seizure of Baha'i personal > property, as well as its denial of Baha'i access to education and > employment, are eroding the economic base of the Baha'i community. > > In 1998 after a nationwide raid of more than 500 Baha'i homes and offices, > as well as numerous arrests, the authorities closed the Baha'i Institute of > Higher Learning. Also known as the "Open University," the Institute was > established by the Baha'i community shortly after the revolution to offer > higher educational opportunities to Baha'i students who had been denied > access to the country's high schools and universities. The Institute > remains closed. > > It has become somewhat easier for Baha'is to obtain passports in order to > travel abroad. In addition some Iranian embassies abroad do not require > applicants to state a religious affiliation. In such cases, it is easier > for Baha'is to renew passports. Nevertheless, in February 2001, the > Government denied visas to foreigners in the Baha'i delegation to the > Asia-Pacific Regional Preparatory Conference for the World Conference on > Racism, held in Tehran. The delegation was composed of American, Japanese, > South Korean, and Indian nationals. > > The authorities particularly are vigilant in curbing what is perceived as > proselytizing activities by evangelical Christians whose services are > conducted in Persian. Government officials have reacted to such activity by > closing evangelical churches and arresting converts. Members of evangelical > congregations have been required to carry membership cards, photocopies of > which must be provided to the authorities. Worshipers are subject to > identity checks by authorities posted outside congregation centers. > Meetings for evangelical services have been restricted by the authorities > to Sundays, and church officials have been ordered to inform the Ministry > of Information and Islamic Guidance before admitting new members to their > congregations. > > Because conversion of a Muslim to a non-Muslim religion is considered > apostasy under Shari'as enforced in the country, non-Muslims may not > proselytize Muslims without putting their own lives at risk. Evangelical > church leaders are subject to pressure from authorities to sign pledges > that they would not evangelize Muslims or allow Muslims to attend church > services. > > Mistreatment of evangelical Christians continued during the period covered > by this report. Christian groups have reported instances of government > harassment of churchgoers in Tehran, in particular against worshipers at > the Assembly of God congregation in the capital. Instances of harassment > cited included conspicuous monitoring outside Christian premises by > Revolutionary Guards to discourage Muslims or converts from entering church > premises, and demands for the presentation of the identity papers of > worshipers inside. > > Some Jewish groups outside the country cite an increase in anti-Semitic > propaganda in the official and semiofficial media as adding to the pressure > felt by the Jewish community. One example cited is the periodic publication > of the anti-Semitic and fictitious "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," both > by the Government and by periodicals associated with hard-line elements of > the regime. In 1986 the Iranian Embassy in London was reported to have > published and distributed the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in English. > The Protocols also were published in serial form in the country in 1994 and > again in January 1999. On the latter occasion, they were published in Sobh, > a conservative monthly publication reportedly aligned with the security > services. > > In February and March 1999, 13 Jews were arrested in the cities of Shiraz > and Isfahan. Among the group were several prominent rabbis, teachers of > Hebrew, and their students. The charges centered on alleged acts of > espionage on behalf of Israel, an offense punishable by death. The 13 were > detained for over a year before trial, largely in solitary confinement, > without official charges or access to lawyers. In April 2000, the > defendants were appointed lawyers, and a closed trial commenced in a > revolutionary court in Shiraz. Human rights groups and governments around > the world criticized the lack of due process in the proceedings. The UNSR > characterized the proceedings as "in no way fair." On July 1, 2000, 10 of > the 13, along with 2 Muslim defendants, were convicted on charges of > illegal contact with Israel, conspiracy to form an illegal organization, > and recruiting agents. They received prison sentences ranging from 4 to 13 > years. Three were acquitted. The lawyers of those convicted filed an appeal > and on September 21, 2000, an appeals court overturned the convictions for > forming an illegal organization and recruiting agents, but upheld the > convictions for illegal contacts with Israel. Their sentences were reduced > to between 2 and 9 years' imprisonment. One of the 10 convicted was > released in February 2001 upon completion of his prison term. A second was > released at the end of his prison term in January 2002. > > Jewish groups outside the country noted that the March 1999 arrest of the > 13 Jewish individuals coincided with an increase in anti-Semitic propaganda > in newspapers and journals associated with hardline elements of the > Government. Since the beginning of the trial, Jewish businesses in Tehran > and Shiraz have been targets of vandalism and boycotts, and Jews reportedly > have suffered personal harassment and intimidation. > > > In 2002 the group Families of Iranian Jewish Prisoners (FIJP) published the > names of 12 Iranian Jews who disappeared while attempting to escape from > Iran in the 1990's. Babak Shaoulian Tehrani (born in 1977) and Shaheen > Nikkhoo (1974) disappeared on June 8, 1994; Behzad (Kamran) Salari (1973) > and Farhad Ezzati (1972) on September 21, 1994; Homayoun Balazadeh (1958), > Omid Solouki (1979), Reuben Cohan-Masliah (1977), and Ibrahim Cohan-Masliah > (1978) on December 8, 1994; Syrus Gaharamany (1939), Ibrahim Gaharamany > (1937), Norallah Rbizadeh (Felfeli) (1952) on February 12, 1997; and > Es-haagh Hassid (Hashid) (1933) on February 15, 1997. Hassid was last seen > in Khorramabad Province. The other 11 all disappeared in Baluchistan > Province. Their families have had no contact with them since the dates of > their disappearance, but reported anecdotal evidence that some of them are > alive and being held in prison. The Government never has provided any > information regarding their whereabouts and has not charged any of them > with crimes. FIJP believes that the Government has dealt with these cases > differently than other such cases because the 12 persons involved are > Jewish. > > Numerous Sunni clerics have been killed in recent years, some allegedly by > government agents. > > There were no reports of government harassment of the Zoroastrian community > during the period covered by this report. > > The Government restricts the movement of several senior religious leaders, > some of whom have been under house arrest for years, and often charges > members of religious minorities with crimes such as drug offenses, > "confronting the regime," and apostasy. > > The Special Clerical Court (SCC) system, which was established in 1987 to > investigate offenses and crimes committed by clerics, and which is overseen > directly by the Supreme Leader, is not provided for in the Constitution, > and operates outside the domain of the judiciary. In particular critics > alleged that the clerical courts were used to prosecute certain clerics for > expressing controversial ideas and for participating in activities outside > the area of religion, including journalism. > > During the latter part of 2000, a Special Clerical Court began the trial of > Hojatoleslam Hassan Yousefi Eshkevari, a cleric who participated in a > conference in Berlin on Iran, on charges of apostasy, "corruption on > earth," "declaring war on God," and "denial of basic religious principles," > which potentially carry the death penalty. Eshkevari has called for more > liberal interpretations of Islamic law in certain areas. The verdict was > not announced, but, according to Amnesty International, Eshkevari widely > was reported to have been sentenced to death. In November 2001, following > domestic and international criticism, his sentence reportedly was reduced > to 30 months' imprisonment and removal of his status as a cleric. In > November 1999, former Interior Minister and Vice President Abdollah Nouri > was sentenced by a branch of the SCC to a 5-year prison term for allegedly > publishing "anti-Islamic" articles, insulting government officials, > promoting friendly relations with the United States, and providing illegal > publicity to dissident cleric Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri in the pages > of Khordad, a newspaper that was established by Nouri in late 1998 and > closed at the time of his arrest. Nouri used the public trial to attack the > legitimacy of the SCC. > > In January 2001, judicial authorities closed Kiyan, a 10-year-old > independent journal specializing in religious and philosophical issues. The > Tehran General Court ordered the closure. The Judge stated that Kiyan had > "published lies, disturbed public opinion and insulted sacred religion." > > Laws based on religion were used to stifle freedom of expression. > Independent newspapers and magazines have been closed, and leading > publishers and journalists were imprisoned on vague charges of "insulting > Islam" or "calling into question the Islamic foundation of the Republic." > In November 2000, a Revolutionary Court began the trials of 17 writers, > intellectuals, and political figures who took part in an April 2000 > conference in Berlin regarding the implications of the February 2000 Majles > elections. In January 2001, verdicts on charges including "insulting Islam" > were announced after unfair and closed trials. At least eight of the > defendants were sentenced to custodial sentences. Charges were reduced on > appeal in December 2001,. Some individuals were acquitted, some sentences > were reduced, and other sentences were converted to fines. > > Forced Religious Conversions > > There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor > U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United > States, or of the refusal to allow such citizens to be returned to the > United States. However, a child born to a Muslim father automatically is > considered a Muslim. > > Section III. Societal Attitudes > > The continuous activity of the country's pre-Islamic, non-Muslim > communities, such as Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians, has accustomed the > population to the presence of non-Muslims in society. However, government > actions create a threatening atmosphere for some religious minorities. > > The Jewish community has been reduced to less than one-half of its > prerevolutionary size. Some of this emigration is connected with the > larger, general waves of departures following the establishment of the > Islamic Republic, but some also stems from continued perceived > anti-Semitism on the part of the Government and within society. > > The Government's anti-Israel policies and the trial of the 13 Jews in 2000, > along with the perception among some of the country's radicalized elements > that Iranian Jews support Zionism and the State of Israel, created a > threatening atmosphere for the Jewish community (see Section II). Many Jews > have sought to limit their contact with or support for the State of Israel > out of fear of reprisal. Recent anti-American and anti-Israeli > demonstrations have included the denunciation of "Jews," as opposed to the > past practice of denouncing only "Israel" and "Zionism," adding to the > threatening atmosphere for the community. > > Sunni Muslims encounter religious discrimination at the local level, and > there were reports of discrimination against practitioners of the Sufi > tradition during the period covered by this report. > > Section IV. U.S. Government Policy > > The United States has no diplomatic relations with Iran and thus cannot > raise directly with the Government the restrictions the Government places > on religious freedom and other abuses that it commits against adherents of > minority religions. The U.S. Government makes its position clear in public > statements, support for relevant U.N. and NGO efforts, and diplomatic > contacts with other countries. > > From 1982 to 2001, the U.S. Government cosponsored a resolution each year > regarding the human rights situation in Iran offered by the European Union > at the annual meeting of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. It passed > every year until 2002, when the United States did not sit on the Commission > and the resolution failed passage by one vote. The United States has > supported a similar resolution offered each year during the U.N. General > Assembly. The U.S. Government has supported strongly the work of the UNSR > on Human Rights for Iran and called on the Iranian Government to grant him > admission and allow him to conduct his research. (He has been denied entry > visas since 1996.) > > The U.S. State Department spokesman on numerous occasions has addressed the > situation of the Baha'i and Jewish communities. The U.S. Government has > encouraged other governments to make similar statements and has urged those > governments to raise the issue of religious freedom in discussions with the > Iranian Government. > > In October 2001, the Secretary of State again designated Iran as a "country > of particular concern" under the International Religious Freedom Act for > particularly severe violations of religious freedom. The Secretary of State > similarly had designated Iran in September 1999 and in October 2000. > > > > Released on October 7, 2002 > > International Religious Freedom Report Home Page > ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 11:51 AM Subject: Re: What is True Friendship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:urihma4sdjm2b4@corp.supernews.com... > >But the review system hampers them -- there are recent events >that I'd bet my bottom dollar they wouldn't be allowed to refer to, >even to give the official side. Karen, Can you share with us what you're alluding to? -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 10:34 AM Subject: Re: What is True Friendship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:d95fcf26.0210260712.5e423783@posting.google.com... > > > > Can you share with us what you're alluding to? > > Dear Fred, > > Nothing that you don't already know about. Remember I'm the *last* > person to get any inside information, except for the individual > stories of individual disillusioned, which I am mostly obliged to keep > confidential. I understand. I occasionally receive emails from people who want to share their stories with me but request that I not post them or whatever, which I respect, unless they're fundamentalists seeking to suppress the evidence.... But I doubt any article written by a Baha'i would even > be allowed to allude to the presence of dissent, much less discuss in > detail the House's response to it. And, as we've seen, the presence of > fundamentalism is just denied. All they can do is present a picture > of the Baha'i community that leaves these things out, in which case, > the things that Juan has brought out in his articles can't be > addressed. And brought out in your article, if you don't mind my saying so. > Their problem is that when it comes to their coercive and punitive > actions, they are pretty much indefensible when it comes to anyone > outside the Baha'i Faith -- it only proves Juan's thesis even to > mention them. And, as Susan mentioned, it would be impossible to get > documentation about what was behind the decisions. All we have is > official statements, which almost uniformly make them look pretty bad. > > The point is, that it's pretty hard for them to "defend the Faith", > when they can't address the basis for the "attacks" in the first > place. The best they can do is present an alternative picture of the > community, which will simply leave out the tough stuff. Now that > Juan's got articles out there raising these issues, the natural > question for anybody reading this stuff will be "Why?" You're quite right on all counts. And, of course, as we who have observed the fundamentalists now for years know, their most common tactic is to attempt to discredit the individual, in one way or another. I shan't recite the litany for the 10th million time! Alas.... I feel the periodic outbursts of "vehement ignorance" are another tactic, really, one perhaps clearly calculated to also discredit and deceive.... Think about it for a while.... Let me know if you don't agree. They're just too orchestrated to be anything else.... Nice fall day here. Just got a load of firewood. Looking forward to cozy little fire tonight! Best, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 10:02 AM Subject: Re: What is True Friendship "> Bacquet wrote: > But I doubt any article written by a Baha'i would even > > be allowed to allude to the presence of dissent, much less discuss in > > detail the House's response to it. And, as we've seen, the presence of > > fundamentalism is just denied. All they can do is present a picture > > of the Baha'i community that leaves these things out, in which case, > > the things that Juan has brought out in his articles can't be > > addressed. > Glaysher wrote: > And brought out in your article, if you don't mind my saying so. >Dear Fred, >Thank you. I've got almost 1800 hits on that article now, no doubt >partly in due to your kind and vigorous promotion of it. And, no, >nobody still enrolled is going to draw attention to the events I wrote >about, in any kind of counter-article. Online, mostly the argument >either runs that the Institutions were justified, or the whole thing >is just belittled ("Why fuss over a handful of people?"), or they tell >me I don't know the whole story, but have nothing substantive to add >to that story. The conservative academic crowd is ignoring my article >entirely, with Susan being the only one to comment at all. But then, >I probably don't rate much with the academic crowd. -- Karen, It's an article that repays the time taken to read it. You understand quite well most of the tactics among my fellow bahais. Glaysher wrote: > You're quite right on all counts. And, of course, as we who have > observed the fundamentalists now for years know, their most > common tactic is to attempt to discredit the individual, in one way > or another. I shan't recite the litany for the 10th million time! > Alas.... I feel the periodic outbursts of "vehement ignorance" > are another tactic, really, one perhaps clearly calculated to also > discredit and deceive.... Think about it for a while.... Let me > know if you don't agree. They're just too orchestrated to be > anything else.... Bacquet wrote: >Well, I'm always a bit skeptical of conspiracy theories -- a trait >that sometimes gets me called "naive" by my friends. There's plenty >of "vehement ignorance" around without it being orchestrated. If >you're talking about this latest stuff with George, I think there is >more going on than meets the eye, but I would hesitate to venture a >guess on what it is. -- Not a conspiracy theory in the wild and crazy sense. A shared view of reality, even fundamentalist, creates common motivation and actions; that's my point. You're right that there is "more going on than meets the eye," which is basically all I'm really saying. The BCCA, hence the institutions, has been very much involved all along in finding ways to "defend the faith." They're more interested in damage control, usually through discrediting individuals and even entire forums of discussion, trb, arb, AOL, and so on. Bacquet wrote: >But I will agree with you that discrediting is a favored tactic. I'm >just lucky I'm was unknown until coming to cyberspace -- nobody knows >how to discredit me, because my style is relatively moderate, which >makes me exempt from some of the accusations of mental instability or >that I'm given to wild speculations. Muffinman on Beliefnet tried >awfully hard though, if you noticed, although he mostly went after my >identity as a Baha'i. All anybody else can do is focus on my being an >amateur writer without academic qualifications, which is something I >freely admit without fuss. Your moderation has always been one of your most outstanding virtues, in my view. They're discrediting you, though, through condenscion, humoring you, etc. To me, another major virtue is that you are not an academician. Your candidness about the fact and about who you are, your being down to earth about everything, i.e., being who you are, those are your greatest assets. Cling to them, in life, as in the Bahai Wars.... Bacquet wrote: >Now, some things, like the virtual disappearance of a lot of old-time >AO defenders, both here, and even more strikingly so at Talisman, may >be as a result from a word from the top -- but that's just speculation >on my part. However, I'll keep my eyes open and will think about what >you've said. There's no doubt that direction has often come from the top. Many of the fanatics have come to realize their position is indefensible, others linger on, braying their distortions, currying favor from those not worth the time of day.... Look again at the email from Mark Towfiq to many of the BCCA's mailing lists, Bahai-Discuss, etc: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Towfiq.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Bahai-discuss-sampler1.txt You see, more than speculation, there is plenty of evidence of involvment at the top. Juan Cole caught, for instance, Hooper Dunbar was monitoring discussion when his autoresponder bounced back a message revealing the fact, etc. To say so is NOT a conspiracy theory, which plays into the hands of the worst elements among my fellow bahais.... All the best to you, -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 11:56 AM Subject: Re: What is True Friendship "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message news:uro2ruab7hkufe@corp.supernews.com... > > If all you want to do is use me as a > foil to do your Juan-bashing, I'm outta here. Exactly what's taking place, Karen. The same holds true for the issues in my previous post this morning. I invite non-observers and newcomers to reflect on my observations along these lines: Having observed the tactics of fundamentalists among my fellow bahais for over twenty-five years, I've learnt a few things about the way they operate: 1. Ad Hominem, Scapegoat, Libel, Slander, Defame, Demonize, Cast in a False Light, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Smear, Discredit, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Silence, Harass, etc., etc., the individual...all of which has become known as "The Bahai Technique": https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm 2. Lure into supposed discussion then cut the jugular. 3. Work together to create the perception for uninformed non-bahais that the individual in question is unbalanced, aberrant, "spamming," a liar, a slander, crazy, disgruntled, reprobate, etc.... 4. Change or ignore the subject by shifting to the past and arguing over who said what, when, where, how, etc.... As long as the uhj uses the "temporary measure" of "review," for over 80 years now, to suppress all free thought and discussion and encourages such unseemly tactics, attempting to discuss anything is simply a waste of time and energy.... I can only hope by serving humbly, as the self-appointed archivist/historian for talk.religion.bahai and for all the many victims of the "universal" house of "justice," that someday someone will come along who will dig deep enough into the record so that the truth will begin to surface. Impartial nonbahai observers might wish to compare and decide for themselves whether the picture fundamentalists labor so hard to paint of me is accurate or not: https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm It is my hope that the distortions of the uhj will begin to be purged, it will gradually reform itself, acknowledging the broad and liberal Teachings of Baha'u'llah that it has suppressed for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:00 AM Subject: Re: What is True Friendship "Dermod Ryder" wrote in message news:api5k6$1mblu$1@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de... > > "Karen Bacquet" wrote in message > news:d95fcf26.0210271512.10021dd1@posting.google.com... > Hi Karen, Fred, > >Karen wrote: > > I think both things are going on -- direction, and just a common > > outlook. We know Susan works closely with the Institutions, and we > > know that they sometimes deliberately put people to work monitoring > > Internet forums. So, for sure, some people are working on the > > directions of the administration. > >Dermod wrote: > I think they monitor on a continual basis and try to infiltrate any > "closed" list or group. As the DST has been caught using the produce > of infiltration I think it is fair to associate her with it as an > accomplice and obviously in total agreement with the tactic. Yes, definitely on a continual basis. It's amusing how opportune are the appearances of new ao supporters in cyberspace, especially under annonymous handles. > > > But there are a lot of people > > running around just "defending the Faith" on their own. In fact, > some of them are so loony, that I doubt the people upstairs are all that happy with their actions, because they make the Faith look so bad. > > These people are expendable but they are prerceived to serve the > purpose of keeping the feeble hearted in line and, optimistically, as > a counter to the more militant opponents of the AO. They also serve > to endeavour to bully and subdue any weak willed or informed moderate. I agree there are freelancers and lackies. Note though that the ao does nothing to restrain them or state in public anything that would SET a different tone. > > Then, there are those who just get freaked out over something they > > read and turn it in. One thing I worry about that is that the > > picture they have of a person is inevitably going to be skewed, > >because what gets turned in is inevitably more critical or > >controversial material. > > I think something of this kind must have happened to Alison, because > > one has to look long and hard through her messages to find anything > > that would upset anybody. She's one of the nicest posters around, > and tends to avoid conflicts -- something that became even more marked > > after her disenrollment. > > I've always been of the opinion that this was a classic effort to > intimidate and turn a prominent liberal who was perceived to be a soft > target capable of being converted. The plan was to bounce her and > intimidate her when she immediately got in touch with them. It went > badly wrong when , instead of prostrating herself at the feet of the > AO, she promptly published the news. This caught the AO with its > trousers down and fingers in the cookie jar - there was no exit > strategy and no damage control. It took weeks for somebody to come up > with the idea that she had been "counselled" in the "classes" in the > area. I think that even the AO, not overendowed with intelligence has > recognised that disenrollments are a major but major cock-up. Do note > that Fred's "dis-enrollment" has turned into a total farce! Rule number one in bahai cyberspace: Never accept their lies. > > Also, there are other "damage control" efforts. They definitely > have > > changed tactics since the Talisman crackdown -- sending two > > inquisitors out instead of just one, then doing disenrollment > instead > > of using the CB threat. I know of three people that have been > > investigated for Internet activity since Alison's disenrollment, and > > all have taken place on the National level -- I think this reflects > > another shift in tactic, keeping the UHJ out of it. And, so far, > none > > of them have been sanctioned or disenrolled, just hassled. The > whole > > Talisman thing was a disaster for them; I don't think it ever > occurred > > to them that people would report their experience or that a > > Counselor's letters would end up on the web. And I hear a lot of > > stories from people who have been hassled by ABM's, before the rise > of > > cyberspace, very often as a prelude to a resignation. This kind of > > stuff damages the Faith's reputation, and they know it. The old > > heavy-handed approach just isn't going to work anymore. > > No exit strategy, damage control that has been tardy and ineffective > plus fear of what the militants might do is much at the heart of the > average (and they are very average, at best) A Onions. Careers are > now at stake! > > > Thank you. In some ways, the best defense is to make sure they > don't > > have any ammunition. :-) I'm not sure, though, that "humoring" me is > a > > tactic to discredit me -- I think my very moderation gives them hope > > that I can be brought back into the fold. But moderation does not > > mean weakness. I'm going to do what I think is right, regardless of > > who approves or disapproves. It can be hard, though, navigating the > > hazardous shoals of Baha'i cyberspace. > > Your "converted" scalp would be a welcome trophy at Wilmette and I do > concur that is at the heart of the way you are handled, especially by > the DST who has a self confessed penchant for seeking out the > potential convert on TRB. As one (and the least at that) of the > "impervious" I am rated far too nasty and negative to be converted, > although were such a miracle to occur, you could be sure that Haifa > would sing a Te Deum, Windy Shepherd Henderson would do somersaults > and the DST could possibly fall off the wagon. And if I could bring > that about, what in under heaven, would Nima's conversion result in - > fatal coronaries all round and lots of vacancies in the AO. > > I think I'll make that my goal for the Five Year Plan! > > Dermod. aka 007 > > > > Love, Karen > > https://www.bacquet.tk Convert to what? They're no longer trying to follow the teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.... They've committed, and sink further into, all the sins of the corrupt religious leaders that Baha'u'llah so vehemently denounced. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: The two faces of bahai fundamentalism.... New York Times review.... One might say as well the two faces of bahai fundamentalism.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ --- The Saudis' Brand of Islam and Its Place in History By RICHARD BERNSTEIN https://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/08/books/08BOOK.html THE TWO FACES OF ISLAM The House of Saud From Tradition to Terror By Stephen Schwartz 312 pages. Doubleday. $25. In April 2002, eight months after the attacks of Sept. 11, a Saudi cleric named Sheik Saad al-Buraik, preaching in a mosque in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, called for the enslavement of Jewish women by Muslim men. "Do not have mercy or compassion toward the Jews," Mr. al Buraik said. "Their women are yours to take, legitimately. God made them yours." Mr. al-Buraik, it is important to note, was a member of the official Saudi delegation that accompanied Crown Prince Abdullah during his visit to President Bush in Crawford, Tex., at the end of April 2002. And Stephen Schwartz argues in "The Two Faces of Islam" that the closeness to power of one who proclaims Jewish women to be Muslim slaves illustrates the deep hypocrisy and corruption of politics in Saudi Arabia, a country that promotes and fosters an extreme, intolerant, terroristic Islamic cult even as it presents itself, in Crawford and other places, as pro-Western and moderate. It has always been thus there, Mr. Schwartz contends, or, at least, it has been thus since the 18th century when an obscure, vengeful, narrow vagabond-cleric named Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab became the spiritual leader of a Saudi tribe, the House of Saud, that eventually became masters of most of the Arabian peninsula. Mr. Schwartz's book is essentially a history of Wahhabism, which is still Saudi Arabia's official, exclusive and, in Mr. Schwartz's view, darkly medieval religion. His central theme is that Wahhabism has over the centuries waged a bitter struggle against all other variants of Islam, most particularly the tolerant, peaceful, poetically mystical schools of thought that, in Mr. Schwartz's view, are the true and admirable historic Islam. Moreover, he maintains that Wahhabism, which gave rise to Osama bin Laden and the Afghan Taliban among others, is the most dread menace faced in the world today by the forces of tolerance and pluralism, whether Muslim or otherwise. "Wahhabism exalts and promotes death in every element of its existence, the suicide of its adherents, mass murder as a weapon against civilization, and above all the suffocation of the mercy embodied in Islam," Mr. Schwartz writes. "The war against Wahhabism is therefore a war to the death, as the Second World War was a war to the death against fascism. But triumph over death is the victory of life." As that paragraph indicates, the emphatic Mr. Schwartz, a journalist and scholar who writes for several American publications, minces no words. The 4,000 members of the Saudi ruling family are, as he puts it, "a vast mafia of princely parasites." He holds the Western oil companies, especially the Aramco partners and "the American political and media elites that have served them," responsible for "the continuation of dishonesty and injustice in Arabia." Contrary to the standard view of him, Mr. Schwartz writes, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran is at the opposite end of the spectrum from Wahhabi extremism and actually represents "the pluralist face of Islam." All of these assertions will bring rejoinders from those who have different views, but Mr. Schwartz's opinions are not just forcefully expressed; they are also born out of a sophisticated and informed vision of history, and he merits both an open mind and a close reading. His book demonstrates a comprehensive mastery of history and historical connections, as well as a deep humanistic concern for those who have been oppressed by Wahhabi ruthlessness. When, for example, Mr. Schwartz turns to the powerful influence of Wahhabism during the years of the anti-Soviet "holy war" in Afghanistan, he not only shows that he understands Afghan politics, but he also makes a strong case that the American failure to understand the complexities of global Islam are one of the main reasons that Afghanistan fell into the Taliban-bin Laden camp. In Mr. Schwartz's version of events, the Americans failed to understand that "two faces of Islam" were present in Afghanistan from the beginning. "On one side, there was the bright aspect of Sufi traditionalism, ever renewed, happy, filled with love of God and humanity," he writes. "On the other was the ugly visage of Wahhabi fundamentalism, narrow, rigid, tyrannical, separatist, supremacist and violent." The Taliban, the products of Saudi-financed Wahhabi schools in Pakistan, clearly represented this second visage, and Mr. Schwartz contends that they could have been avoided altogether had American policymakers only understood that. But Mr. Schwartz argues that "Islam, especially in the days of Khomeini, remained too alien and frightening" for the State Department to make such distinctions. Or, if American policymakers did make distinctions, he says, they made the wrong ones, preferring the Saudi-backed guerrillas to anyone who echoed Khomeinism. Still, Mr. Schwartz writes, "The real exporters of international Islamic extremism were the Saudis," though "the Saudis did not miss the opportunity to stoke the Western fear of Iran in order to bolster their false image as Arab `moderates.' " One might argue here that Khomeinism, which dispatched the terrorist Hezbollah, or Party of God, into the world, did its share of exporting extremism, as it did when it called on good Muslims to execute the writer Salman Rushdie for the crime of blasphemy. And while Afghan traditionalism may have been filled with love of God, over the centuries it produced its share of blood-letting even without the help of the Saudis. In other words, some of what Mr. Schwartz writes makes you want to argue with him, or at least raise some questions. Nonetheless, there is an admirable shrewdness, a suffer-no-fools briskness, to his analysis, and he has that ability to make the hard-to-see historical parallels. Among the most interesting of them: in the first half of the 20th century, the Saud-Wahhabi alliance came to supreme power in Saudi Arabia by cleverly aligning itself with British imperialism; how similar that now seems to the Saudi ability to enlist unwitting American support for putting into power the Wahhabi faction in Afghanistan (at least until it was dislodged after Sept. 11). It is fascinating suggestions like this that give "The Two Faces of Islam" some of its value - along with its more general ability to engage the mind, making it grasp matters in a new way. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 8:04 AM Subject: The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem - Frederick Glaysher - Review & Interview I'd like to share with my friends here another side of my life, for those interested: Review of The Bower of Nil: A Narrative Poem (2002): https://www.juddtech.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1178 Interview: https://www.brothersjudd.com/webpage/glaysherinterview.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 8:50 AM Subject: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Dennis Rogers[SMTP:SHT33@rockwood.k12.mo.us] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 2:25 PM To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com Subject: Removal of Narrative Dear Fred, I would greatly appreciate it if you would remove my narrative from your web site...I have been tracked down, harassed and contacted by various Baha'is and Muslims wishing to "dialogue" with me...my experience has left me quite traumatized and these unwanted e-mails do not help the matter. I have also been contacted by Christian groups wanting me to "testify" for them...basically wanting to use me for their own ends...at this point I wish to be left alone from all the religious warfare. The narrative served it's purpose at the beginning...thanks Dennis Dennis James Rogers Media Services Rockwood Summit High School 1780 Hawkins Road Fenton, MO. 63026 636-861-7700 Phone 636-861-7717 Fax sht33@rockwood.k12.mo.us ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: Re: Salvation Through Baha'u'llah You might want to try talk.religion.bahai Available on the Web too: Free reading and posting, including the largest Usenet archive: https://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai (Add it to your Favorites!) Or you can might want to try the free news server at https://news.cis.dfn.de/ News.CIS.DFN.DE AOL: Keyword newsgroups, Expert Add, talk.religion.bahai, etc. Other free news servers exist. The above, in my opinion, are the best. The top two require creating a free account with user name and login, but, like Outlook Express (see below), they're not too difficult to set up. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ "Don Bradley" wrote in message news:77df6008.0211251344.3cc2852b@posting.google.com... > Hi, > > I recall reading statements to the effect that salvation in our age is > only through Baha'u'llah. But it seems that I have also read that > people of various faiths will be saved, whether or not they accept > Baha'u'llah. > > Are there any writings that clearly distinguish the afterlife rewards > of Baha'is from those of non-Baha'is? In other words, do Baha'is teach > others their faith to bring those others to _salvation_? Or is the > Baha'i faith spread because it is true and can transform _this_ world, > but not because others need to convert to it for their souls' sake? > > Any perspectives on this? > > Don ---------- From: f_glaysher@hotmail.com[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 6:54 AM To: SHT33@rockwood.k12.mo.us Subject: Re: Removal of Narrative Sounds about right. Email me the exact name and URL of the files you want off. Fred >From: "Dennis Rogers" >To: >Subject: Removal of Narrative >Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:25:07 -0600 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from rockwood.k12.mo.us ([204.184.29.11]) by mc8-f30.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 25 Nov 2002 11:25:31 -0800 >Received: from Rocwd-MTA by rockwood.k12.mo.uswith Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:25:17 -0600 >Message-Id: >X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.1 >Return-Path: SHT33@rockwood.k12.mo.us >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2002 19:25:31.0346 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B371320:01C294B8] > >Dear Fred, >I would greatly appreciate it if you would remove my narrative from >your web site...I have been tracked down, harassed and contacted by >various Baha'is and Muslims wishing to "dialogue" with me...my >experience has left me quite traumatized and these unwanted e-mails do >not help the matter. I have also been contacted by Christian groups >wanting me to "testify" for them...basically wanting to use me for their >own ends...at this point I wish to be left alone from all the religious >warfare. The narrative served it's purpose at the beginning...thanks >Dennis > >Dennis James Rogers >Media Services >Rockwood Summit High School >1780 Hawkins Road >Fenton, MO. 63026 >636-861-7700 Phone >636-861-7717 Fax >sht33@rockwood.k12.mo.us ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 8:56 AM Subject: Two Comprehensive Intros to the Bahai Wars - - >> Professor Cole and Karen Bacquet Two Comprehensive Intros to the Bahai Wars For those interested in understanding what's taking place regarding the Bahai Wars, on talk.religion.bahai as elsewhere, I urge you to read some of the primary material on my website and the sites of Professor Cole and Karen Bacquet: Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community." American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, pp. 109-140: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 8:58 AM Subject: 3 Messages to bahai "universal" house of "justice" --- Haifa, Israel Three Messages to bahai universal house of justice ------------------------------------------------------- March 31, 1997 The universal house of justice of the bahais of the world Haifa, Israel Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: After careful reflection and prayer for the past few days, I've decided that open public discussion and knowledge are more important than my own status as a Bahai. I have been a Bahai for more than twenty years, since 1976. I became a Bahai by reading almost every single Bahai book published at the time. Given my background as a Catholic and poet, I was deeply moved by the beauty and profundity of the Bahai Writings. As a young person, I spent two months travel teaching throughout Michigan with several other youthful, innocent Bahais. Like many, I have sacrificed financially to contribute to the Bahai Faith. I pioneered for a year and a half in Japan, for two years on an American Indian reservation, and have travel taught in China. The spiritual profundity of the Bahai vision, as reflected in the work of the African-American poet Robert Hayden, inspired me to study at the University of Michigan under him and to spend considerable time and labor editing his collected poems and prose for Liveright and the University of Michigan Press. I have published two essays in the Bahai magazine World Order and spent more time than I can remember at Bahai summer camps, workshops, and deepenings. Throughout all my varied Bahai experience, I have loved the Figures and Teachings of the Faith even as the conviction has grown that all information and discussion in the Bahai Faith is subtly manipulated, controlled, and distorted for the "good of the Faith." There seems to be a pervasive, rigid control of all thought, ideas, and information that calls into question the motives of the individuals in power in the Bahai Administration. As a published writer and former college and university instructor of rhetoric and literature for over ten years, I believe the whole process of "review" has become a complete farce and disgrace to the Bahai Faith and is suggestive of the worst censorship under the most repressive regimes, religious or secular, of historical experience. If one truly wishes to understand why many Bahais, both highly educated and others, leave the Bahai Faith or become "inactive" and withdraw into silence and uninvolvement with the religion, one need only to look objectively at what seems to be the oppressive and coercive methods of people in the Bahai Administration itself to find the answer. My experiencing of these same methods of censorship and distortion on soc.religion.bahai proved to be the last intolerable straw. My attempt to form an unmoderated newsgroup on the Internet that no one could manipulate and censor has a long experience of Bahai tyranny in the background. The resorting to deceit and back-channel communication by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai and others naively believing they're working for the benefit of the Bahai Faith by campaigning for 691 unethical NO votes on talk.religion.bahai further proves the pervasive acceptance of disreputable tactics by Bahais in their attempt to maintain a stranglehold over all thought and discussion. Recently, more than ever, I've often recalled the words to me in private several times of Robert Hayden, the only Bahai to be appointed Consultant in Poetry to the Library of Congress: "Why I continue to have anything to do with the Bahai Faith, I do not know, I do not know." I myself no longer know. I suppose I hope that the oppressive, coercive methods that have come to be accepted and justified in the Bahai Administration, demonstrated for instance in the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the incidents surrounding the Bahai Encyclopedia, the listserv Talisman I, and the continuingly crude, unreadable propoganda vehicle of the American Bahai, might yet be put aside in favor of the beautiful vision of Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha for freedom of religious conscience and belief and a humane, tolerant universalism. I fear that all too often the religious totalitarianism of Baha'u'llah's fanatical homeland has seeped into every nook and cranny of His religion, smothering out the free light of the human soul and hamstringing His Administration. It was with the bitterest of feelings that I observed some time ago the Bahai exhibition, a deceitful propaganda event really, on freedom of religious conscience and belief sponsored by the National Spiritual Assembly in the rotunda of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., so far in reality from the truth was it, so misled, trusting, and uninformed were the Congressmen of my country.... If censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith, I would like to know what passages of the Bahai Writings support it and what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship. It seems to me that censorship pervades the Bahai Faith so thoroughly that some Bahais regularly use it as a method of intimidation and silencing of anyone with an unconventional opinion by accusing the individual of being a covenant breaker. This tactic was used against me by at least three Bahais during the discussion period for talk.religion.bahai and tacitly condoned by the moderators and others. I include, at the end, a threatening, coercive email message I received on March 27, 1997, from Mr. Hoda Mahmoudi, Auxiliary Board Member for Michigan, at a crucial juncture of the discussion and voting for talk.religion.bahai and would like an explanation of his motives. I, and perhaps the rest of the world, would greatly appreciate evidence that there are not now nine ayatollahs residing in Israel on Mt Carmel. Respectfully, Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ >Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:45:46 -0500 >To: FG@hotmail.com >From: Hoda Mahmoudi >Dear Mr. Glaysher: > >I have been reading your e-mail postings recently. I would like to speak >with you by phone about some of your throughts and opinions regarding >matters relevant to the Baha'i Faith. As an Auxiliary Board members for >Michigan, I am always interested in issues which relate to individual >spiritual responsibility and the Baha'i Faith's principle of unity. My >phone number is 616/789-0590. > >Hope to hear from you soon. > >Hoda > >Hoda Mahmoudi, Ph.D. >Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs >Olivet College >Olivet, MI 49076 >616/749-7614 Further details on Hoda Mahmoudi's coercive email https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Mahmoudi.htm David Langness on Hoda Mahmoudi https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm Paul Dodenhoff on Mahmoudi https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/srb95.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patrick Henry patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than ayear and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with thecollusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/BCCAmenu.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? -- The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ --------------------------------------------------------------- From: Patrick Henry Subject: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 8:33 AM Given the uhj's oppressive tactics and violation of the human rights of Linda and John Walbridge, Stephen Scholl, other editors of the Dialogue magazine, the Bahai Encyclopedia editors who resigned in protest, David Langness, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Nima Hazini, former Assistant to the Auxiliary Board Paul Dodenhoff who resigned, and so on, and so on, and so on.... All the victims documented on my website.... I hesitate to put the uhj above any reprehensible act.... including conspiracy to murder Dr. Daniel Jordan. I have been a member of the Bahai faith since 1976. My ID Card may be found on my website. I have never been contacted by the uhj or any of its underlings to the contrary. Anything I have ever said is a matter of the sanctity of my individual God-given conscience that both Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha claimed would never be violated in their religion. I shall "cc" this message to the uhj so that they hear from me directly on the matter. I would consider it an honor to be one of its official victims; indeed, the highest spiritual achievement of my Bahai life, defending Baha'u'llah'sTeachings from the fanaticism that has overwhelmed and hamstrung his Revelation. -- Frederick Glaysher.... "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Confirmation of receipt by the uhj of the message above.)From: Incoming Electronic Communication Operations Subject: Your Message Has Been Received... Date: Friday, December 10, 1999 5:36 AM Dear Friend, This is an automated acknowledgement. Your message regarding: Re: Fred's Baha'i Membership Could Not Confirmed has been received at the Baha'i World Centre. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- From: Roderick Young[SMTP:rekohu_bahai_rjy@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 3:15 AM To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com Subject: what is happening in the Baha'i Administration Dear sir I am interested in your home page that I got to via Goggle groups. I note the feeling that you express and I was shocked how I have recently felt the same. I do have a perspective on it/ In science of Biology there was a time when the brain chemestary processed things slower that the stimulus happened from outside. This meant the brain was unable to simulate and reality happened faster than the simulation in the brain. Then a new path way was found with a new chemical pathway and that was the start of cognitive reflective thought. I say to you that our administrative system is unable to simulate faster than reality at the moment and is dragged along by reality like a kid being pulled by a hurrieying mother. But I believe a new chemical pathway is about to emmerge and the LSA will have elected to it people who will process information faster than reality and this will lead to inclusiveness. I beleive what we are feeling at the moment is the new ground and we will soon stumble onto the new chemical path way or member ship of our institutions who know how to consult then we will see Houses of justice. Remember also we have to see the fall of the fossil fuels first so that life will be more rural orientated than city dominated as it is under the burning of fossil fuels. The country is for the soul and the city is for the body. I trust you will achnoledge my science. Roddy Young --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 12:23 PM Subject: CAUTION -- Non-bahais -- Zone of DECEPTION -- Non-bahais -- CAUTION -- Non-bahais -- Zone of DECEPTION -- Non-bahais -- I caution you that appearances may be deceiving on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. It cannot be ruled out that some of the most vociferous voices here are working on behalf of the fundamentalist bahai administration to create an atmosphere of vicious contention in order to discredit the views of others, for unsuspecting outsiders, as well as to drive them away from investigating very deeply into what is actually taking place among bahais. I highly recommend the following articles: Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, Dept. of History, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community," American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:28 PM Subject: talk.religion.bahai on the Web through Google talk.religion.bahai on the Web: Free reading and posting, including the largest Usenet archive: https://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai (Add it to your Favorites!) Or you can might want to try the free news server at https://news.cis.dfn.de/ News.CIS.DFN.DE AOL: Keyword newsgroups, Expert Add, talk.religion.bahai, etc. Other free news servers exist. The above, in my opinion, are the best. The top two require creating a free account with user name and login, but, like Outlook Express (see below), they're not too difficult to set up: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Usenet.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:17 AM Subject: Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists - Having observed the tactics of fundamentalists among my fellow bahais for over twenty-five years.... Why I Don't Respond to bahai Fundamentalists Having observed the tactics of fundamentalists among my fellow bahais for over twenty-five years, I've learnt a few things about the way they operate: 1. Ad Hominem, Scapegoat, Libel, Slander, Defame, Demonize, Cast in a False Light, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Smear, Discredit, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Silence, Harass, etc., etc., the individual...all of which has become known as "The Bahai Technique": https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm 2. Lure into supposed discussion then cut the jugular. 3. Work together to create the perception for uninformed non-bahais that the individual in question is unbalanced, aberrant, "spamming," a liar, a slander, crazy, disgruntled, reprobate, etc.... 4. Change or ignore the subject by shifting to the past and arguing over who said what, when, where, how, etc.... As long as the uhj uses the "temporary measure" of "review," for over 80 years now, to suppress all free thought and discussion and encourages such unseemly tactics, attempting to discuss anything is simply a waste of time and energy, given the pervasive atmosphere of lies and deception. I can only hope by serving humbly, as the self-appointed archivist and historian for talk.religion.bahai and for all the many victims of the "universal" house of "justice," that someday someone will come along who will dig deep enough into the record so that the truth will begin to surface. Impartial nonbahai observers might wish to compare and decide for themselves whether the picture fundamentalists labor so hard to paint of me is accurate or not: https://fglaysher.com/bio.htm It is my hope that the distortions of the uhj will begin to be purged, it will gradually reform itself, acknowledging the broad and liberal Teachings of Baha'u'llah that it has betrayed for so many years.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 9:18 AM Subject: Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing - My ID Card may be found on my main bahai page.... Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing - Despite the libel and slander of many fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, I have been a member of the bahai faith since 1976. My ID Card may be found on my main bahai page. I have never been contacted by the uhj or any of its underlings to the contrary. The reason the uhj allows and encourages fundamentalists among my fellow bahais to backbite, libel, and slander me on talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, AOL, BeliefNet, and elsewhere may be discovered in the four messages below: To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm To uhj 12-10-1999 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/uhj12-10-99.htm Open Petition for Baha'i Reformation February 8, 2001 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Reformation.htm My Request Not to Receive the American Bahai 1996 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/nsa1996.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:43 AM Subject: "Please remove my name and address from your mailing list." - I asked for nothing other than my name and address to be removed from the "Please remove my name and address from your mailing list." - In 1996 my request to the circulation department for the American Bahai, repeated twice and perhaps a third time, read, "Please remove my name and address from your mailing list." I had torn off the preprinted address change label regularly published on the back page of the American Bahai and mailed it into the address given for subscription changes. I asked for nothing other than my name and address to be removed from the mailing list--no gloss, no explanation, no complaint, no threat, etc.... Dermod Ryder's speculation that willingness to receive the American Bahai has become compulsory should give pause.... Again, note well, I used the address on the back of the American Bahai given specifically for handling subscription addresses. I did not write the nsa, its secretary, etc. My communication was limited to the simplest of requests: remove my name and address from your mailing list. Not a word or suggestion about withdrawing from the Bahai Faith, nor any criticism of it whatsoever, real nor implied. I conveyed my wishes to the proper address, as announced in the American Bahai itself. That I received a response back from an entirely different address speaks volumes, as they say. After six years, I believe the time is now right to release it publicly. I've scanned the letter so others might read the original. I am not about to accept the slander, libel, and backbiting of fundamentalists. I prefer the facts: Again, I declared my belief in Baha'u'llah in 1976 and notified the nsa, who sent me back the declaration card available on my homepage. I have never notified them otherwise. They, as distinguished from liars and sycophants online, have never notified me to the contrary. Scanned orignials: https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/nsa1996.htm The other two letters were related to the Detroit local spiritual assembly and its junk mail. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:44 AM Subject: bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - over 600 fundamentalists followed the advice of fanatic Mark Towfiq and others bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience - The Mahmoudi message was sent to me the very morning of the day that the first voting period for talk.religion.bahai ended on March 31, 1997 and the RESULTS was posted, when over 600 fundamentalists followed the advice of fanatic Mark Towfiq and others to oppose free speech and open discussion.... https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Towfiq.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/1stRESULT.htm If a letter was sent to Mahoudi, it addressed only that context. It's a well known fact that Maneck is Gharidian's sycophant. If she has been given a letter intended for the context of Hoda Mahmoudi's interferring in the free and unfettered voting for talk.religion.bahai, thereby violating the very Words of Abdu'l-Baha extolling freedom of speech and conscience and which led me to appeal to the uhj for an explanation of Mahmoudi's deceitful interference, let her post a copy of it on talk.religion.bahai, though it is tantamount to backbiting and further slander, in my opinion, to distort a communication in one context to fit the evil designs of a corrupted fundamentalist administration in another. See Mahmoudi's deceitfully sugarcoated, intimidating letter at the bottom of the link below. Note that Mahmoudi never asked to meet with me but to telephone her. The other claims along these lines are false, i.e., that if a letter or message was sent to Mahmoudi it was posted to Usenet. Further note that the administration is definitely interferring in free speech and conscience here on talk.religion.bahai and other online venues through their various sycophants in contradistinction to Abdu'l-Baha's elevating vision. To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/uhj12-10-99.htm I reiterate that I am under no obligation to believe the claims of vulgar liars and slanderous pseudo-academicians distorting past events and communications to fit a now different agenda. https://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.g oogle.com&output=gplain I notified the nsa of my declaration of belief in Baha'u'llah in 1976. They acknowledged my declaration by sending me back the ID card available for viewing on my homepage and by accepting monetary contributions from me for years, not to mention many personal sacrifices. Further details of my participation in the bahai faith, in sundry ways, may be found in my uhj letters also accessible from my homepage. If the nsa has unilaterally changed my status as a member of the bahai faith, the obligation resides with them to notify me to that effect, which they have never done.... I urge the non-bahai looking in on this exchange to investigate and reflect carefully on the issues involved and on what they reveal about the bahai faith in practice versus theory.... Consider too that the real target of the fundamentalist attack on me may actually be the bahai community at large, to strike fear and obedience in their hearts in order to control them and to insure their submission, lest they too become the object of such a ferocious, incessant onslaught of slander and abuse.... Other relevant messages and details at https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/nsa1996.htm https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/images/Bahai-IDgif.gif For those who think this smear campaign is something new, Google archives my being hounding by the fundamentalists along these lines for years: https://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f ilter=0 I place my trust in Baha'u'llah. And I am a Baha'i in *Perfectly* Good Standing. I repeat that if a letter was written to Mahmoudi and Maneck has a copy of it, let her post it to talk.religion.bahai.... Maneck stated I had written and posted a message to Mahmoudi on google. I've neither acknowledged nor denied that I wrote a letter to her but rather that if one exists she's free to post it to talk.religion.bahai. If such a letter ever existed, it never appeared on my website. Note: Maneck has again revealed the extent to which she works behind the scenes with the fundamentalist elements of the administration. Her obvious game here is merely to discredit and smear me with malicious charges based on distortions taken out of context. I've answered her distortions sufficiently below. Her personal insults reveal much about her and the tactics of her fellow fundamentalists who have also betrayed Abdu'l-Baha's great Words, "in the world of religion there should be the right of unrestricted individual belief." The link below demonstrates no such message from me to Mahmoudi exists on Google: https://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f ilter=0 And it's not on my website. Since you're the one claiming it exists and was posted on my website, it's up to you to prove it. If your bosses have given you a copy, post it here on talk.religion.bahai. Or are you a liar, who can only libel, slander, smear, and discredit other bahais who don't share your fundamentalist interpretations with bogus claims, attempting to drive them out since you can't tolerate anyone who doesn't mirror back to you your own literal-minded views.... More insight on Hoda Mahmoudi by Paul Dodenhoff who resigned from the bahai faith and his position as an Assistant to the Auxiliary Board : https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/srb95.htm -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ See too David Langness, author of the censored "Modest Proposal," on Hoda Mahmoudi: "I would advise you to be careful about any meetings, calls orcorrespondence with Hoda Mahmoudi, who used to be an ABM here in Southern California. She is quite conservative, and sees herself -- as do many of the appointed branch, sadly -- as a staunch defender of the Faith and the faithful, able and more than willing to marginalize people like you and I to discredit our ideas. This cultlike practice of shunning and casting out any dissidents has unfortunately become the chief tactic of those fundamentalist Baha'is bent on maintaining the current leadership. My worry is that the more progressive Baha'is like Juan Cole and Steve Scholl and yourself will all leave the Faith and thereby increase the power of the conservatives." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm ---------- From: info@bahai.org.br[SMTP:info@bahai.org.br] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:46 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Exclude us in your mailing! Thanks. ------------- Segue mensagem original ------------- De: Frederick Glaysher Data: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 08:08:37 -0500 Para: info@bahai.org.br Assunto: The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience This is a multi-part message in MIME format. The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience Please consider adding my website to your page of links. Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 7:00 AM Subject: Dr. Hashem Aghajari's Speech and Subsequent Death Sentence FYI The analogies are irrefutable.... -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ Special Dispatch Series - No. 445 December 01, 2002 No.445 https://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD44502 The Call for Islamic Protestantism: Dr. Hashem Aghajari's Speech and Subsequent Death Sentence By: Ayelet Savyon Dr. Hashem Aghajari, a University of Hamedan history lecturer, journalist, and active member of the reformist Islamic Revolution's Mujahideen Organization (IRMO), was arrested in August 2002 and sentenced to death on November 6, 2002, because of a June address he gave commemorating the 25th anniversary of the death of Dr. 'Ali Shari'ati, one of the ideologues of the Islamic Revolution. In his speech, Aghajari built on the foundation of Shari'ati's thoughts to achieve legitimacy for his own ideas, but actually presented his own perception of "Islamic Protestantism" and reform in Islam;[i] he also criticized Iran's ruling religious establishment. In his speech, Aghajari argued that a mediating echelon of clerics had developed in Islam that stood between God and the believers - something which runs completely counter to the nature of Islam, which differs from Christianity in this aspect. Aghajari sharply criticized this echelon, which is today in power in Iran, for its conservativism and petrifaction, for blocking society's advancement, and for exploiting the name of God. He also attacked it for its willingness to accept technology, usually rejected on religious grounds, in special cases - such as when it comes in the form of luxury cars. These clerics, says Aghajari, see themselves as above the people, as sanctified; they exploit their status in the regime to ensure their own survival and their hold on power, while corrupting Islam and Islamic values. Agharaji maintained that these corrupt clerics are blocking the people's, and primarily the young people's, access to the Koran and to understanding it, and preventing them from developing independent thought. He claimed that they have created a state monopoly on the religion. Worst of all, they are changing the essential nature of Shi'ite Islam by imposing a single government interpretation of the religion that perpetuates their status, and by denying other high-ranking clerics' the right to issue religious rulings on the basis that their rulings "are not Islam." Aghajari was directing his criticism at the low-level clerics who despite their under-qualification nonetheless hold key positions throughout the regime and presume to lead the country in the spirit of Islam. These clerics range from Supreme Leader 'Ali Khamenei and former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, now head of the extremely powerful Expediency Council,[ii] down to the lowest echelons of the regime. In his speech, Aghajari suggested differentiating between what he calls "core Islam," the best of the Islamic religious ideas, and "traditional Islam," which includes various additions to "core Islam" that have occurred over the years. In his opinion, these additions are damaging and are not genuinely based on "core Islam." He said that Islam could be interpreted in accordance with the zeitgeist, and that changes over time necessarily dictated changes in interpreting Islamic precepts. Agharahji spoke against the "principle of emulation" (Taqlid) in Shi'ite Islam,[iii] saying that because of it, the people would always remain enslaved by the clerics' interpretation and would never be able to develop independent thought. He called for a new kind of emulation to underpin the relationship between the clerics and the people: the new model would be the relationship between teacher and pupil - in which the pupil eventually becomes independent - instead of imitation, that is, the relationship between master and servant. Further, Aghajari said that an essential part of "core Islam" was "Islamic humanism," which would give equal rights to men and women, and to Muslims and non-Muslims, and respect the rights of all. He said that the essence of Islamic humanism is the principle of human rights - treating every person as a human being, even if he is a political dissident. Aghajari also criticized the regime for violating the human rights of political activists, particularly with the use of torture. Click here to read the text of the speech, or scroll down. *Ayelet Savyon is Director of the Iranian Media Project ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- [i] Aghajari clarified that religion had always occupied a central role in Iranian society. For the past two centuries, Shi'ite clerics have enjoyed the status of guardians of the Iranian public. [ii] Supreme Leader Khamenei, who holds the low rank of Hujjat ul-Islam, was pushed upwards to the rank of Ayatollah when he was appointed Iran's Spiritual Leader, because according to Ayatollah Khomenei's doctrine of "Rule of the Jurisprudent," the jurisprudent who is a source of authority, knowledge and justice is the one worthy of leading the country. No jurisprudent with such qualifications could be found to succeed Khomenei after his death. As will be recalled, Ayatollah Hussein 'Ali Montazari was ousted from his position as Khomenei's successor for criticizing the regime. Rafsanjani is also a Hujjat ul-Islam, even though the conservative press refers to him as an Ayatollah. [iii] According to taqlid (the "principle of emulation") in Shi'ite Islam, society is divided between two categories of religious status. The first group is highly exclusive - the Maraje Taqlid, or "sources of emulation," several Mujtaheds of the rank of Ayatollah Ozma (Grand Ayatollah). These Mujtaheds have the right of Ijtehad. Each of them may issue independent rulings, which applies only to his particular followers. The second group, the "emulators," is the masses. Each Shi'ite Muslim chooses a Marja-e Taqlid, and follows his rulings. In practice, the right of Ijtehad, or the right to issue fatwas, and the principle of emulation contributed to a close relationship between the follower and the leader he chose, and reinforced the Ayatollahs' power to defend society, socially and morally, against oppression by the ruler. It is worth noting that Shi'ite Islam never endorsed any one interpretation of an issue, and no one Ayatollah was officially more senior than another. Click here to read the complete text. Dr. Hashem Aghajari, a University of Hamedan history lecturer, journalist, and active member of the reformist Islamic Revolution's Mujahideen Organization (IRMO), is a disabled veteran of the Iran-Iraq war. In June 2002, Aghajari delivered an address commemorating the 25th anniversary of the death of Dr. 'Ali Shari'ati, a prominent intellectual and one of the ideologues of the Islamic Revolution.[1] In August 2002, Aghajari was arrested; on November 6 he was sentenced to death by a Hamedan court for blaspheming the Prophet Muhammad, insulting the Shi'ite imams, and insulting top state religious authorities.[2] In his speech, Aghajari used Shar'iati's legacy to express his own criticism of the relations between the state and religion in contemporary Iran. He began his speech by addressing the need to rejuvenate Islam with "Islamic Protestantism" (which Shari'ati had advocated[3]), and reviewed Iran's contemporary history, including the period from the 1905 Constitutional Revolution through the late 1960s and 1970s, saying: "Some people thought that a military overthrow of the Shah's regime would bring the dawn of a new era. because in Iranian society and Iranian culture, religion is and has been the main core throughout the ages, before Islam [began] and after, before the Safavid dynasty[4] [early 16th century] and after, when the majority of Iranians became Shi'ite Muslims. The following is the text of his speech.[5] The Concept of Protestantism In his address, Dr. Aghajari described Christianity prior to Protestantism, focusing on the Church hierarchy and the corruption rampant among the clergy. He said that Islam is in a different position than Christianity: "The Protestant movement wanted to rescue Christianity from the clergy and the Church hierarchy - [Christians] must save religion from the pope. We [Muslims] do not need mediators between us and God. We do not need mediators to understand God's holy books. The Prophet [Jesus] spoke to the people directly. We don't need to go to the clergy; each person is his own clergy." "Shari'ati maintained that all the religious messages offered by formal and traditional religious organizations were antiquated, and that any protest against [these traditional religious organizations] was [regarded by the clerics as] a protest against Islam itself. "Core Islam" and "Traditional Islam" "Part of Dr. Shari'ati's work was to separate [what he called] 'core Islam' from [what he called] 'traditional Islam.' Many additions were added to Islam's core, [but] they were not part of the core; they were merely historical additions. It must be kept in mind that 70 or 80 years ago, the Shi'ite Muslim clergy was opposed to eliminating public bathhouses where one could immerse oneself in large containers of water and replacing them with showers and modern bathing facilities. But, of course, they have made some concessions to modernity when it comes to their own lifestyles, such as owning a car." The Role of the Traditional Clerics "At the time of the Constitutional Revolution [1905-1907], the Islamic clergy was opposed to modern sciences such as chemistry and physics. [In their eyes], chemistry meant that there is no God. But in today's world the clerics take what suits them. If I drive a Peykan [a cheap Iranian-made car] they drive the latest model luxury cars (audience applause). Is this right? They have made these concessions because they use [modernity for their own benefit]; they taste it and then decide that it isn't such a bad thing (smiles in the audience). Seventy or 80 years ago, they opposed these things in the name of Islam; they called it Haraam [forbidden in Islam]. Up until very recently, learning English in Islamic religious institutes of higher learning was forbidden." The Need to Separate "Core Islam" from "Traditional Islam" "Dr. Shari'ati would have said that this clergy has not descended from Heaven; it is contemporary, but their minds are medieval. As long as this mindset does not change, and these leaders do not change, the people who follow their interpretation will continue to think that Shi'ite Islam cannot be a modern religion, and [Shi'ite Islam] will be used by the misguided. Instead of serving as a driving force for progress and advancement, it will become a cause of continued backwardness." "Dr. Shari'ati sought to fight this attitude. He wanted to separate 'core Islam' from the 'traditional Islam' which is comprised of interpretation of Islam by the leaders of previous generations - because he believed that 'traditional Islam' was merely the result of the experiences of some people from generations past and that it should not be sanctified. [The clerics'] thinking is inflexible and incomplete. In our tradition, Shi'ites wear a ring on the middle finger of the left hand. This is a symbol of being a Muslim. If you ask one of these clerics [about it], they say it is an obligation and a religious principle. Look at the writings of Alameh Majlesi and the book of Halieh Al-Motaqin - the book that guided Muslims 1400 years ago. Now imagine that today a Muslim wants to dress like they did then, eat like they used to, act like they used to. Is this Islam?" "[The way in which] the religious scholars of previous generations understood and interpreted Islam is not Islam. It was their interpretation of Islam; [however] just as they had the right to interpret the Koran [in their way], we have the same right. Their interpretation of Islam is not an article of faith for us. We must return to the separation of 'core Islam' and 'traditional Islam.' Part of Shari'ati's struggle concerned the interpretation of Islam and how someone who wants to be a Muslim in the 20th and 21st centuries [cannot do so in accordance with] the Islam that prevailed in Mecca and Medina 1400 years ago - [towns] with fewer residents than some of today's smaller Iranian villages." Islam Must Suit the Thoughts and Reality of Today "The Islam of today is different. It is very clear that we have a different understanding of it in all areas, including economics. It has to suit the thoughts and realities of today. Just as people at the dawn of Islam conversed with the Prophet, we have the right to do this today. Just as they interpreted what was conveyed [to them] at historical junctures, we must do the same. We cannot say: 'Because this is the past we must accept it without question.' This is putting too much emphasis on the past. This is not logical." "For years, young people were afraid to open a Koran. They said, 'We must go ask the Mullahs what the Koran says,' [since] it was used primarily in mosques and cemeteries. The new generation was not allowed to come near the Koran; [young people] were told that [first] they needed [training in] 101 methods of thought and they did not possess them. Consequently, [the young people] feared reading the Koran. Then came Shari'ati, and he told the young people that these ideas were bankrupt; [he said] you could understand the Koran using your own methods - you could understand as well as the religious leaders who claim to have a ton of knowledge. The religious leaders taught that if you understand the Koran on your own, you have committed a crime. They feared that their racket would cease to exist if young people learned [Koran] on their own." The Clerics Have Become a Ruling Class "In Islam, we never had a class of clergy; some clerical titles were created as recently as 50 or 60 years ago. Where did we have a clerical class in the Safavid dynasty? [Today's titles for Islamic clergy] are like the Church hierarchy - bishops, cardinals, priests. This type of hierarchy in [contemporary Shi'ite Islam] is an imitation of the Church. [Today], this clerical hierarchy is headed by the Ayatollah Ozma [i.e. the 'Grand Ayatollah']. And a level down you have an ayatollah, Hujjat ul Islam, Thaqqat ul Islam, and so on." "In the past few years, [the religious institutions] have become a sort of government institution, and the issue has become more sensitive. Is there anyone in our society who understands the distinction between a Hujjat ul Islam and an Ayatollah?[6] Shari'ati said that in Islam we do not have a class of religious leaders. This is not the 'core Islam.' It is a development of historical Islam, and, fortunately, we have not yet seen [in Iran the establishment of] a single central apparatus based on the ranks of clerical titles. For years, there were many parallel [Marja-e Taqlid] institutions,[7] and each Marja-e Taqlid [Ayatollah Ozma] [Grand Ayatollah] had his own structure." "Today, [the ruling clergy] in Iran wants to consolidate all the Ayatollah Ozma organizations under a single rule. (The audience applauds wildly.) Shari'ati said that in Iran, we have never had a true clerical class. This is what they want to do in our country. I doubt whether they will succeed because of our independence and the elements that we have in Shi'ite Islam. The divisions and the hierarchies they wanted to create are Catholic [and not Islamic]. Some of the clergy are so engrossed in what they are trying to do that they start thinking of themselves as icons." A Cleric is Not a Divine Being "Shari'ati used to say that the relationship between [the clergy] and the people should be like the relationship between teacher and pupil - not between leader and follower, not between icon and imitator; the people are not monkeys who merely imitate. The pupils understand and react, and they try to expand their own understanding, so that someday they will not need the teacher. The relationship that the fundamentalist religious people [seek] is one of master and follower; the master must always remain master and the follower will always remain follower. This is like shackles around the neck [i.e. eternal slavery]. We must understand that the master is not a holy, divine being, and we cannot grant him that status. They [the Iranian ruling clergy], however, want to exercise total power. Shari'ati did something about it; he told the religious leaders: 'You are not imams, you are not prophets, [you] cannot consider the people a subhuman species.' They are born the same way we all are, their blood is the same color as yours; they are born like you; they issue from their mothers' wombs. They are the same creatures of God that you are.'" Non-Muslims Too Have Inalienable Rights "If we, as Muslims of divine and perfect Islam, value mankind, and say that [people] are human beings regardless of religion, even if they are not Muslims, even if they are not Iranians, such as Turks, Kurds and Lurs,[8] whatever they may be - [we should say that] they are human and they have inalienable rights. Dr. Shari'ati believed that in the Western world, humanism is not strongly rooted because it is not based on religious principles. But in Islam, humanism is God's creation; it is by God's grace that we are here. These should not be merely nice words that we utter, like saying people have rights. Such words are vitally important - they are crowns on our heads. [Therefore], when [ordinary people] want to express an opinion, [the clerics cannot say] they haven't the power to decide and don't know what's good for them." "Today's Islam [should be] 'core Islam,' not 'traditional Islam.' Islamic Protestantism is logical, practical and humanist. It is thoughtful and progressive. In contrast to the days of Shari'ati and his followers - who were religious reformists, both clergy and non-clergy, in religious and university circles, such as [Ayatollah] Taleqani[9] and [Mahdi] Bazargan,[10] [Ayatollah] Beheshti[11] and [Ayatollah] Mottahari,[12] and the leader of them all, the great leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini [here, Aghajari did not pause long enough to allow the audience to praise Khomeini's name the customary three times, but only once], all of whom tried to say that Islam is connected to life, and is not indifferent to society and people, today we are facing a difficulty. Many people who were not even part of the Islamic Revolution have now come to center stage and say that 'traditional Islam' is true Islam. The difference between our time and Shari'ati's time is that then, the clergy did not have power. Today, Islam is in power; clerics are in the government. That is why Islamic Protestantism has become much more important today." We Need a Religion that Respects the Rights of All "We need a religion that respects the rights of all - a progressive religion, rather than a traditional religion that tramples the people. We cannot say 'Anyone who is not with me is against me.' One can be whatever one wants to be. One must be a good person, a pure person. We must not say that if you are not with us we can do whatever we want to you. By behaving as we do, we are trampling our own religious principles." The Clerics Don't Observe the Constitution - Flogging is Torture "When someone says, 'I'm an [observant] Muslim,' you can no longer curse him, insult him, this is haraam, haraam [forbidden]. In our culture we need Islamic humanism; we need both religious culture and community culture. Every human being is worth something; none can be trampled. This principle is stated in our constitution. But unfortunately in the past decade, it has penetrated the minds of the people in the Islamic Republic that it needn't be so. This was their excuse for torture. They [the ruling clergy] say: 'We arrested someone, he has some information, he is a member of some group, he has been active in something. Under ordinary interrogation he isn't confessing, so we must torture him so he sings like a canary.' This is exactly what the constitution condemns - but the rulers do not observe it. Whipping is torture. They say that if someone is accused of a crime, he should be made to suffer so he doesn't do it again." A Call for Islamic Humanism and Islamic Protestantism "Today, more than ever, we need the 'Islamic humanism' and 'Islamic Protestantism' that Dr. Shari'ati advocated. Today, we need it more than ever. While [the leaders] of the Islamic Republic apparently do not recognize human rights, this principle has been recognized by our constitution. In many non-Islamic countries, they at least recognize these principles in dealing with their own people. Maybe when it comes to other people, they oppress them - [like] what Bush is doing, and most Western nations, if they had the power. Human rights have become so vital in some foreign countries that some of our own clergy, whom I see going for two or three weeks of medical treatment, become enchanted with how the authorities of those countries act towards their own people. About 150 years ago, [a Muslim cleric] went to Europe; when he came back, he said, 'I saw no Muslims in Europe, but I saw Islam' [i.e. he saw righteousness]. In our time, we see Muslims, but we don't see Islam (audience applause)." Without Respect for Human Beings, There is No Islam "The regime divides people into insiders and outsiders. They [the ruling clergy] can do whatever they want to the outsiders. They can go to their homes, steal their property, slander them, terrorize them, and kill them - like [the intellectual activists] Said Hejjarian, and the late [Dariush] Forouhar and his wife [Parvaneh Eskandari][13] - because they were outsiders. Is this Islamic logic? When there is no respect for human beings?" " When [Imam] 'Ali [the Prophet Muhammad's son in law and successor, according to Shi'ite Islam] sent an emissary to Egypt, he told him, 'You are a powerful man. Be good and just to the people. There are two groups of these people: Either they are Muslims, and therefore your brothers, or they are your fellow human beings. Behave towards them according to Islam.' Islam does not say Muslims and non-Muslims." A Call for Ijtehad; Men and Women are Equal "Finally, Islamic Protestantism is something we need because when our religious understanding and thought are betrayed, we must constantly refer back to our own religious frame of reference. In Shi'ite Islam they call it Ijtehad.[14] Shari'ati had some serious thoughts about Ijtehad. First, Ijtehad is not limited to one group. Second, Ijtehad does not mean that only one cleric is the well-versed expert [Marja-e Taqlid]. Unfortunately dishonesty, deception, and petrifaction happen when religiously observant people go to a Marja-e Taqlid ['Source of Emulation'] [of their choice], who issues a fatwa, and then other clergymen attack him or the fatwa. You saw what happened with Ayatollah Saneii. Some of the clergy say that a Mujtahed [high-ranking Ayatollah] can issue a fatwa. Then, when he issues a fatwa [that is counter to the ruling clerics' views] they [the ruling clergy] say: 'You may not do so and reinterpret [the Koran].' A Marja-e Taqlid may say: 'I have performed Ijtehad [and issued a fatwa] that contradicts what has been said before,' 'Women have as many rights as men and men and women have equal rights.' Then someone else [of the ruling clergy] attacks this Marja-e Taqlid, telling him, 'Who says that your opinion represents Islam? This is not Islamic.' So I [Aghajari] ask: 'Why is one more Islam than the other?" Voices from the Audience: Someone shouts: "Because one fatwa is the word of the Koran and the other is not." Someone else protests, calling "Aghajari namard" (you are not a man, therefore you are a scoundrel), and repeats, "You are a liar," "namard," and "You accuse God and the prophets of lying." At this point, Aghajari leaves the meeting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- [1] Shari'ati (b. 1933) was a political activist who called for moves against the Shah to be based on Islam, even though he was not a cleric. His anti-imperialist approach and condemnation of both liberal capitalism and Marxism attracted a strong student following. Shari'ati said that the solution for the oppressed peoples of the Middle East was "Islamic humanism." He attacked the traditionalist clergy and their fatalism towards and appeasement of the Shah's regime. Even though he rejected Marxism as a political system, he was profoundly influenced by Marx, and adopted his terminology. Shari'ati died in 1977 under mysterious circumstances. [2] IRNA, November 13, 2002. According to IRNA, he was also sentenced to 74 lashes and eight years' imprisonment in desert cities, and banned from teaching for 10 years. [3] The transcript of the speech includes the transcriber's comments on the audience's response to Aghajari's comments on various issues. [4] From the time Shi'ite Islam was endorsed as Iran's state religion in 1501 by the Shah Isma'il, the founder of the Safavid dynasty (1501-1722), coexistence and peace reigned between the religious and political establishments. Not only did the shah reign, but he also sought religious legitimacy for his rule, and the clergy was given central posts in the government. During the Qajar Dynasty (1796-1925), major shifts became evident in the interrelations between state and religion; since the 19th century, the clergy has been at the forefront of popular anti-regime movements. These shifts were largely the result of changes in the religious establishment, as it increased the clergy's standing and power and encouraged it towards fundamentalism and political activism. [5] For the complete speech see: https://news.gooya.com/2002/07/02/0207-22.php [6] i.e. between low-ranking religious scholars and the highest rank of all. Apparently hinting to the fact that several political leaders of Iran such as 'Ali Khamenei, Iran's spiritual Leader, and 'Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's former president and currently head of powerful 'Expediency Council,' carry the rank of Hujjat ul Islam without having the religious scholarly qualifications. [7] Ijtehad is the right to issue fatwas based on the independent thinking and interpretation by an authorized cleric. According to taqlid (the "principle of emulation") in Shi'ite Islam, society is divided between two categories of religious status. The first group is highly exclusive - the Maraje Taqlid, or "sources of emulation," several Mujtaheds of the rank of Ayatollah Ozma (Grand Ayatollah). These Mujtaheds have the right of Ijtehad. Each of them may issue independent rulings, which apply only to his particular followers. The second group, the "emulators," is the masses. Each Shi'ite Muslim chooses a Marja-e Taqlid, and follows his rulings. In practice, the right of Ijtehad and the principle of emulation contributed to a close relationship between the follower and the religious leader he chose, and reinforced the Ayatollahs' power in society, socially and morally, against oppression by the ruler. It is worth noting that Shi'ite Islam never endorsed any one interpretation of an issue, and no one Ayatollah was officially more senior than another [8] One of Iran's ethnic minorities. [9] Ayatollah Sayyed Mahmoud Taleqani, a well-liked liberal, progressive, and intellectual cleric. He was Ayatollah Khomenei's ally during the Islamic Revolution, although he had reservations about Khomenei's thought. [10] The first prime minister under the Islamic regime, and one of the important intellectuals who supported the Islamic Revolution. He was later deposed by Ayatollah Khomenei. [11] Another high-ranking Ayatollah who supported the Islamic Revolution. [12] Ayatolla Morteza Mottahari, a leading cleric who was imprisoned by the Shah. [13] The last two were murdered in November 1998 with the involvement of "rogue agents of the Intelligence Ministry." No one has been sentenced for the crime. Iran Daily (English), November 23, 2002. [14] For explanation of terms, see Footnote No. 7. ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 7:33 AM Subject: bahai - START HERE - NEWCOMERS - Cole and Bacquet's articles below provide a comprehensive.... exercise unusual caution bahai - START HERE - NEWCOMERS - Newcomers to talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai might want to exercise unusual caution. It will require more than a passing glance at a few messages to begin to understand what is taking place here. I suggest you begin with the links below which provide a historical survey of the last several years of bahai censorship and then visit further my website, Karen Bacquet's, and Professor Cole's. Cole and Bacquet's articles below provide a comprehensive view of fundamentalism within the bahai faith today. -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Professor Juan Cole's "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review 2002: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community." Published in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, pp.109-140: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html "AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research center and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a growing network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roll Call of Victims https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/RollCall.htm To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm The Bahai Technique ---- **Essential Reading** ---- Demonize, Libel, Slander, Discredit, Smear, Scapegoat, Shun... etc.... https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:03 AM To: bacquet@tco.net Subject: correction https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html Johnson, K. Paul. (1997).Baha'i leaders vexed by on-line critics. Gnosis. Electronic version retrieved January 8, 2002 from Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship/Gnosis.html --- Hi Karen, Testing my own website, I just noticed you have a slight mistake in your code. My page is named Gnosis.htm - No "l" Incidentally, www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship was knocked out for a few days. I had emailed about 480 bahai websites around the world, apparently upsetting people in certain quarters! Best, Fred ---------- From: Karen Bacquet[SMTP:bacquet@tco.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:28 AM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: correction ---------- From: Bahai Faith[SMTP:BI*P*GS@LIBERTY.COM] Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 7:00 AM Subject: ** The Bahai Technique ** - Ad Hominem, Libel, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Backbite, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball The Bahai Technique - Ad Hominem, Libel, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Backbite, Defame, Vilify, Discredit, Smear, Revile, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball, Coerce, Silence, Harass... etc., etc.... CAUTION NON-BAHAIS ------------------------------------------------------------------ During the last decade or two a number of observers have noted common methods many fundamentalists among my fellow bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: ------------------------------------------------------------------ OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY. "Scapegoat (Lev. xvi) 1. Invented by Tindale 1530.... One of the two goats that was chosen by Lot to be sent away into the wilderness, the sins of the people having been symbolically laid upon it, while the other was appointed to be sacrificed. 2. One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others. 1867 Freeman, He has been made the scapegoat for many of the sins both of other individuals and of the whole nation." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Scapegoat.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------ Professor Juan Cole, University of Michigan, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB [Covenant Breaker (heretic)] to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket. Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole10.htm Professor Juan Cole, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all). Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'isor when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith. The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fallsilent. With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them. This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute. Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole71.htm Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [since 1976]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." https://fglaysher.com/LettersAmD1989-1994.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the soc.religion.bahai moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble isthat this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular.Very sad." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/House2.htm Ron House wrote in message news:3DAE2CE7.7D7925AC@usq.edu.au... October 2002, WROTE REGARDING SUSAN MANECK's Technique: If this were the the first, or a rare, occasion on which this specimen had got up to this shenanigan, we might let it pass. But it is, in my experience, her typical pattern of "debate": take something from another poster, think out some uncharitable 'consequence' that she thinks follows from it, and then assert as factual that the original posters were in favour of her uncharitable interpretation. It is, imho, a fundamentally malicious and dishonest way to conduct debate. Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a groupacts this way. Very scary." Dermod Ryder, September 19, 2001: "And then Eureka! I realised why Fred gets the treatment he does . . . for Fred has painstakingly not only assembled the evidence of the canker within but he constantly publicises it to the extent that he really gets up noses and AO noses at that! . . . I basically agree with him that the AO terrorises people - terror is more than bombs or kamikaze aircraft. A whispered aside in the right circumstances can instil terror (like a threat to be made a CB) - most ethnic cleansing is carried out by a piece of "good" advice to the effect that one would be better off NOT living in this neighbourhood, from a gentleman who is known or assumed to have the "right connections" to ensure the advice is heeded. Twenty years ago the AO tried that particular threatening tactic on with me and were told where they could stick it! Others can also testify to that including Dennis Rogers whose experiences were posted on TRB recently. And you guys hate Fred for this, for his continued exposing of the sewer that the AO has become. Of course you all hate Juan, Alison, Michael, Nima etc as well and for the same reason and give them the same treatment but somewhat reduced for they don't post as much as Fred who is just a real pain in the butt for doing what he does so well! Fred is an avid counter terrorist and he's good at it as the whimpering from the BIGS proves!" https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Ryder2001.htm Dermod Ryder, February 28, 2002: "This is what is known as the "love bomb" technique. Disregard and entirely ignore the substance of any complaint or criticism and throw out this carpet of "bahai love" which will overwhelm the reason and appeal to the emotion. I've been vaccinated! What I also glean from recourse to this technique isthat there is no answer to the points I raised. In effect you guys who support the AO do so through thick and thin to the point where you cannot and will not admit that it has any faults of any substantive value. Because guys like me cannot agree with you - the fault is obviously ours." K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998:"In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the firstplace." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/srb73.htm Steven Scholl, March 12, 2002: "The problem in her [Susan Maneck] cult view of the world is the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal Baha'i affairs so that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place in the Baha'i world. The great sin is ignoring the Baha'i taboo against speaking out against internalinjustices because to do so is to tarnish the reputation of the Baha'i institutions. Good Baha'is are expected to take their abuse in silence. If they speak out against abuse, they are regarded as internal opposition and come under investigation from the Baha'i Inquisition. They are villified and threatened, even told that their status in the afterlife is threatened if they don't change their ways. And, yes, this was a key element [in] the little drama that played out between the Baha'i leadership and myself." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Scholl4.htm David Langness, 31 Mar 1997: "I would advise you to be careful about any meetings, calls or correspondence with Hoda Mahmoudi, who used to be an ABM here in Southern California. She is quite conservative, and sees herself -- as do many of the appointed branch, sadly -- as a staunch defender of the Faith and the faithful, able and more than willing to marginalize people like you and I to discredit our ideas. This cultlike practice of shunning and casting out any dissidents has unfortunately become the chief tactic of those fundamentalist Baha'is bent on maintaining the current leadership. My worry is that the more progressive Baha'is like Juan Cole and Steve Scholl and yourself will all leave the Faith and thereby increase the power of the conservatives." https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- For two excellent introductions to the Bahai Wars: Professor Juan R. I. Cole, University of Michigan, "Fundamentalism in the Contemporary U.S. Baha'i Community," Religious Studies Review, Vol. 43, no. 3 (March, 2002):195-217: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2002/fundbhfn.htm Karen Bacquet, "Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community." Published in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, Volume 18, pp.109-140: https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html -- Frederick Glaysher The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/